Effects of series elasticity and activation conditions on muscle power output and efficiency
1 Structure and Motion Laboratory, Institute of Orthopaedics and
Musculoskeletal Sciences, University College London, Royal National Orthopedic
Hospital, Brockley Hill, Stanmore, Middlesex, HA7 4LP, UK
2 Structure and Motion Laboratory, The Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead
Lane, North Mymms, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL9 7TA, UK
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: awilson{at}rvc.ac.uk)
Accepted 24 May 2005
![]() |
Summary |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: muscle, model, energetics, elasticity, biomechanics
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
The amount of series elasticity present in a muscle, mostly in the
aponeurosis and the tendon, can vary depending on its role. Series elasticity
has been identified as an advantage in the antigravity muscles of running
animals, because the tendon will elongate under load and store elastic strain
energy, which is subsequently returned later in the movement. For instance, in
the wallaby gastrocnemius the muscle fibres are almost isometric and do not
change length much during stance, but there is considerable elongation in the
series elastic element (SEE; Biewener et
al., 1998). The wallaby muscles, however, represent one extreme of
muscle design, and most muscles consist of longer fibres and less significant
series elastic tissue. It has been observed that a large amount of series
elasticity will enable energy storage at the cost of accurate length change
(Alexander, 2002
) and it has
been predicted that the SEE will increase the versatility of a muscle since
the muscle fibres can contract at a different speed from the overall muscle
tendon unit (MTU; Fukunaga et al.,
2002
; Galantis and Woledge,
2003
). It has not been shown how the presence of different amounts
of SEE actually influence the economy, power and versatility of muscle under
different locomotor conditions, and in particular which activation conditions
are optimal.
The relationship between power output and efficiency of a muscle under
different contraction conditions has been examined extensively. Experimental
comparisons of the optimum activation conditions for power production and
efficiency demonstrate that the frequency of oscillation, length change, duty
cycle and phase of activation all affect both the power output and the
efficiency of muscle (Barclay,
1994; Curtin and Woledge,
1996
; Ettema,
1996
). In those experiments, various combinations of phase, duty
cycle, length change and frequency of oscillation achieved optimal power
output and efficiency. However, the activation patterns used showed a broad
optimum and there did not seem to be a direct relationship between power and
efficiency. Hence animal muscle has a range of activation patterns and length
trajectories in which they can operate at maximal power or maximal efficiency,
or perhaps some combination of the two.
We have previously shown that the activation conditions for optimum power
output and efficiency can be reproduced using a Hill-type muscle model that
estimates the energetic cost of contacting the muscle
(Lichtwark and Wilson, 2005).
This model was based on experimental data from the white myoseptal muscle of
the dogfish and validated using data from the mouse soleus muscle. The
inclusion of a series elastic element, which is able to store elastic strain
energy for subsequent release, changes the time course of power development
from that seen in the muscle fibre bundles themselves. However, muscles that
operate with different functions often have a broad range of different elastic
tissues (including tendon, aponeurosis, perimyosium and myoseptum) attached
both in series and in parallel, and these structures have different levels of
compliance. In addition to this, the maximum force-generating capacity of a
muscle and the muscle fibre length can vary greatly compared to the compliance
of the elastic structures. Therefore the activation conditions and the overall
length change of the entire MTU that achieve optimal power output and
efficiency should vary greatly between muscles with different architecture and
function. It is proposed that the energetic function of a muscle dictates the
architecture of the MTU: the length of its muscle fibres, the maximum
force-generating capacity and the compliance of the series elastic tissue.
Variation in the elasticity of a muscle has been predicted, using a model,
to affect its function by altering its work-generating capacity and its
efficiency under various activation conditions
(Ettema, 2001). Although
similar power outputs and efficiencies can be obtained with a muscle
regardless of the SEE stiffness, these maxima have to be achieved with
different activation conditions (i.e. different duty cycles and phases). For
instance, muscles with a stiff SEE are most efficient when activated during
shortening, whereas a compliant SEE would be most efficient when activated
during stretch in a stretchshorten cycle
(Ettema, 2001
). A stiff SEE is
least efficient when activated early in the stretch phase because the
contractile element (CE) is forced to absorb work during the stretch phase and
then actively generate work at a high energetic cost. However, the amplitude
of length change of a muscle will also alter the proportion of length change
occurring in the SEE and the CE and this must also be accounted for when
determining the influence of SEE stiffness on muscle power output and
efficiency. Finally, the level of activation of a muscle may also have an
effect on the time course of events in a cyclic contraction, particularly
power output and energetic cost, and therefore its effect on power output and
efficiency should also be explored.
By applying an energetic model of muscle contraction
(Lichtwark and Wilson, 2005)
it is possible to explore and map the relationship between power and
efficiency of muscle with varying duty cycle, phase of activation, amplitude
of length change and activation level. This type of protocol is difficult to
undertake experimentally on muscle tissue due to muscle fatigue and the
difficulty in keeping muscles alive for the duration of these lengthy in
vitro studies. Applying a validated model allows the experimenter to test
across a broader range of conditions and also makes it possible to vary the
properties of the muscle to explore how this affects muscle power output and
efficiency.
We hypothesise that activation conditions (timing and duration of activation) exist that elicit a range of powers with near optimal efficiency and that generation of these from models would match experimental data for locomoting animals. We also hypothesise that the activation conditions required to generate optimum power output and optimum efficiency of a muscle are highly dependent on the stiffness of its series elastic element.
In this paper we test these hypotheses as follows. (1) We vary the timing
and duration of activation in a modified Hill-type muscle model
(Lichtwark and Wilson, 2005)
to determine the optimum conditions to maximise power output and efficiency.
We compare the optimum activation conditions for generating maximum power
output and efficiency, and explore how a biological system can approach the
optima of both simultaneously. (2) We vary the stiffness of the elastic
element and the amplitude of the length change that the muscle undergoes to
determine their effect on power and efficiency under different activation
conditions. (3) We determine how the stiffness of the series elastic elements
might influence the behaviour of a muscle and explore some biological examples
which highlight this effect. (4) We determine the effect of changing the level
of activation on power output and efficiency of muscle under different
activation conditions.
![]() |
Materials and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
We then used the same techniques to explore how these results might
theoretically vary by changing the series elastic stiffness and also the total
length change (amplitude) of the MTU throughout a sinusoidal length change.
The original model (Lichtwark and Wilson,
2005) was operated across length changes within the plateau region
of the forcelength relationship of the muscle. However, in this
investigation it was necessary to extend the length change of the MTU such
that the muscle fibre length may affect its force and energy output. Therefore
a typical forcelength relationship of a sarcomere
(Gordon et al., 1966
) was
incorporated to scale the force-generating capacity of the muscle fibre,
depending on its length (Fig.
1A). The number of possible crossbridges attached is related to
the relative overlap of the actin and myosin filaments, and therefore the
maintenance heat rate also needs to be scaled by the forcelength
relationship in the same way that activation level scales the maintenance heat
rate. Although it has been demonstrated that the forcelength properties
of a sarcomere do not accurately represent those of whole muscles or muscle
fibre bundles (particularly on the descending limb), this model is believed to
be satisfactory in this case because the muscle fibre length change should not
exceed Lo ±0.25Lo (where
Lo is optimal muscle fibre length and force P is
always greater than 70% of maximum isometric force,
Po).
|
The muscle model incorporates a SEE stiffness, which is represented in normalised form, relative to Po and Lo. This represents the amount of force produced (relative to the maximum force) for any given length change (relative to the muscle fibre length). Therefore if the absolute stiffness of the SEE remained constant, but the muscle optimum muscle fibre length doubled, then the relative stiffness would also double.
We used the model to find the optimal activation conditions and length
changes for achieving maximum power and efficiency at a stiffness range lower
than that measured experimentally, and determined how these optimal conditions
change as a result of the lower stiffness. Here, the relative stiffness was
reduced from 22xPo/Lo to
4xPo/Lo (with a lower stiffness
of 16x and 3xPo/Lo,
respectively, at forces below 0.15Po, to account for the
toe region of the forcelength properties of the SEE; see
Lichtwark and Wilson, 2005)
and the length change increased from ±0.0335Lo to
±0.2Lo. With these values of stiffness and
amplitude of length change, the power output and efficiency of the muscle were
explored across a space of duty cycles and phases of activations. In addition,
a NelderMead simplex (direct search) optimisation technique was again
used to determine the optimum values of duty cycle, phase of activation and
length change to achieve the maximum power and efficiency. The relative
stiffness of muscles with similar functions but from a range of species was
also determined to compare the findings from the simulations.
Finally, we explored the effect of activation amplitude on power output and efficiency across the range of duty cycles and phases of activations. The activation amplitude here was defined as a simple arithmetic scaling of the activation properties of the muscle. For instance, an activation amplitude of 0.5 was equivalent to activating 50% of the fibres, thereby scaling the activation maximum level of activation by this amount. This relationship is demonstrated in Fig. 1B. Byapplying an activation levels at 30%, 50% and 100% we explored how power output and efficiency vary across the space of duty cycles and phases.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
The work loops of the CE, SEE and the MTU to achieve maximum power output and efficiency at a cycle frequency of 1.25 Hz and with a length change of ±0.035Lo are shown in Fig. 2B. To achieve a maximum power output, the MTU has very little length change as the force rises rapidly to a maximum and remains high while the muscle shortens. Once the muscle deactivates (indicated by the thin portion of the line) the force falls quickly, with very little length change in the muscle. This allows the maximum area under the forcelength curve to be achieved. The CE, however, shortens (as the SEE is stretched) to produce force and then also lengthens as the force falls (absorbing small amounts of energy). In contrast, during the maximally efficient contraction, the CE has very little length change (and no stretch) as the force falls. As a result the MTU shortens as the force drops. As there is no hysteresis in the model of the SEE, there is no energy lost here and the area under both the CE work loop and the MTU work loop must be the same.
Series elastic stiffness and length change
The relationships between power output and efficiency with varying series
elastic stiffness, amplitude of oscillation and activation parameters (duty
cycle and phase of activation) are shown in
Fig. 3. When the relative
stiffness was reduced, the maximum power output was achieved with a similar
duty cycle, but the muscle needed to be activated further into the stretching
cycle of the MTU. This is the case for both the small and large amplitude of
length change. A similar relationship holds true for maximum efficiency,
although smaller duty cycles are required.
|
At the lower amplitude of length change it is apparent that the maximum power output achievable reduced from 0.067 to 0.051xPoLo/cycle when the stiffness was changed to the lower stiffness. In contrast, at the high amplitude of length change, the power output was higher for both stiffnesses; however, it is higher for the low stiffness condition (0.175) compared to the experimental stiffness (0.156). A similar effect is found for efficiency, where a reduction in stiffness saw the maximum efficiency change from 0.304 to 0.169 at the small amplitude and 0.416 to 0.399 at the large amplitude. When the muscle model has a small stiffness with a large amplitude length change, the activation conditions that achieve maximum power output and efficiency were closest.
Maximum power output and efficiency
Effects of series elastic stiffness
Fig. 4 demonstrates the
effect that the relative stiffness of MTU has on maximum power output and
efficiency (with optimised activation conditions) at different amplitudes of
length change. This shows that a MTU with a higher relative stiffness of the
SEE will achieve its optimum power output at a lower amplitude of length
change compared to that of its optimum efficiency. However, the simulation
with the lower relative stiffness achieved its maximum for both power and
efficiency at a similar amplitude of length change. The absolute value of
maximum power output and efficiency varied very little with the change in
stiffness.
|
Optimisation of both activation conditions and the amplitude of length change at different relative stiffnesses demonstrated that under the optimal conditions, the maximum values of power output and efficiency do not vary greatly with relative stiffness (Fig. 4B). However it is apparent that there is a trend of reduced maximum efficiency and increased maximum power with a reduction in stiffness. The conditions that produce these maxima are also plotted in Fig. 4B. A higher duty cycle is required for optimal power output, compared to efficiency; however, this changes very little with relative stiffness. With increases in stiffness, the onset of activation must be later (i.e. phase of activation must be higher; closer to the beginning of the shortening phase, 0) and this effect is more apparent to achieve optimal efficiency. The opposite is true for the amplitude of length change, where the optimal length change of the MTU reduces with increasing stiffness and must be smaller to achieve maximum efficiency.
Table 1 lists a number of anti-gravity muscles from animal species ranging from a hopping mouse to a horse and the relative stiffness of each. From this table it is apparent that, relative to the length of the fibre and the maximum force-generating capacity, the compliance of the tendon tends to increase (decreasing stiffness) with the size of the animal. The stiffness of the horse SEE is almost an order of magnitude smaller than that of the hopping mouse.
|
Power and efficiency
Effects of amplitude of activation
By varying the amplitude of the activation, which may be thought of as
reducing the number of active fibres in a whole muscle or bundle of fibres, it
is possible to map the change in power output and efficiency with varying
activation conditions. Fig. 5 shows the variation in power output and efficiency as the result of varying
the maximum activation level to be 30%, 50% and 100% (amplitude of length
change=0.0335). It is apparent the optimal activation conditions to achieve
maximum power output and maximum efficiency and the actual level of efficiency
are very similar, regardless of activation level. However, the magnitude of
the power output is dependent on activation level.
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
It was assumed that during animal locomotion a muscle's power output is
constrained by the movement that it wants to perform. If the conditions of
locomotion change, for instance if an animal accelerates or runs uphill, some
muscles will need to increase their power output to produce the required work
on the centre of mass in a limited of period of time
(Gabaldon et al., 2004;
Roberts and Scales, 2002
). To
achieve the required power output the activation pattern can be varied in
numerous ways, not only by changing the duty cycle and phase, but also the
activation level and frequency of stimulation. Therefore there are obviously
large, but finite, combinations of activation patterns that can achieve the
required power output. It is likely that these activations may also be
constrained by pressure towards efficiency. The results of this modelling
study suggested that there are indeed activation patterns (at least for the
two activation variables altered in this simulation) that achieved a
combination of both. For instance, if the animal needed to produce 90% of its
maximal power, it is conceivable that it would use a smaller duty cycle and
activate at the beginning of shortening of the muscle to achieve the highest
efficiency available for that power output
(Fig. 2).
An examination of the work loops arising from activating the muscle for optimal power and efficiency helps demonstrate the importance of the SEE in determining the conditions for optimum power output and efficiency. In maximum power conditions, the work performed by the MTU (area underneath the forcelength trace) is maximised for the conditions, and is almost square in shape. For this to occur the contractile component shortens whilst at high force (and activation), and then lengthens during deactivation. This is not the case for achieving maximum efficiency, and in fact the CE only lengthens whilst fully deactivated. This is necessary for high efficiencies because work is not then absorbed by the CE, and less time shortening at high activation reduces the heat output during the contraction. Therefore there are distinct differences in how the muscle must be activated to achieve either maximum power or maximum efficiency.
Varying the compliance of the SEE will have the effect of altering the timing of the rise and fall of force and also the length change of the CE, therefore this will have a large influence on the relationship between conditions for optimal power or efficiency. This is confirmed by the results shown in Fig. 3, which demonstrates that with a significant decrease in the stiffness of the SEE, the phase of activation required to maximise the power and efficiency is earlier than for the high stiffness. Duty cycle for these conditions changes little, except during large length change (±0.2Lo), where the maximum efficiency can be achieved with a significantly longer duty cycle of 0.22 (compared to approximately 0.1), closer to that of the maximum power. This suggests that relatively compliant tendons may enable a muscle to activate with both high power output and also high efficiency.
The amplitude of the length change of the muscle relative to its stiffness was also shown to be important in influencing the relationship between power output and efficiency. Although similar optimum values for power output and efficiency can be achieved with muscles, regardless of compliance, the length change of the muscle during the cyclical length change heavily influences the magnitude of the maximum values achievable (under optimal activation conditions). Fig. 4 demonstrates that longer relative length changes (about 0.2Lo) can achieve the highest power output and efficiency of muscle with compliant SEE, whereas the stiffer SEE would require small amplitude length changes for optimal efficiency and larger length changes for optimal power output.
Whilst considering the design of a muscle, one must also examine the
primary function of a particular muscle. It is interesting to note that the
optimal duty factors and phases of activation are well within those recorded
biologically during repetitive activation in a range of species that employ
oscillatory movements. Consistently, investigators of animal locomotion have
found that muscles that undergo cyclical length changes will activate before
shortening begins (negative phase) and deactivate when the muscle is still
shortening (Askew and Marsh,
2002; Biewener et al.,
1998
; Griffiths,
1991
; Tobalske et al.,
2003
). This is in agreement with our findings, which suggest that
to have a high efficiency at any given power output, the muscle should be
activated just before or after shortening begins, and the muscle should only
continue to be activated whilst the muscle is still shortening (smaller duty
cycles).
The stiffness of the SEE relative to the CE length places the results of the simulations into context. It was interesting to find such a large change in the relative stiffness with an increase in animal size. Fig. 4 would suggest that this range of stiffness differences would not have a great effect on the maximum power output or efficiency of the muscle; however, the conditions under which this can be achieved would vary greatly. For instance, MTU values with low relative SEE stiffness are likely to have undergone larger amplitude length changes relative to the CE length and activated early during the stretch of the muscle to obtain optimal power output and maximum efficiency. This is certainly the case for many large animals which, according to Table 1, have low relative SEE stiffness. These muscles often have long tendons and short muscle fibres, which is the architecture required for low relative stiffness. Whilst these muscles are not required to achieve high positional control, it is important that they are efficient and powerful.
The timing, amplitude and duration of muscle activation are indeed
important for power production and also efficient movement. During cyclical
movements such as locomotion, the theoretical power output of many muscles is
actually low, but under varying conditions such as acceleration and changes in
grade, muscle can be required to produce (or absorb) power
(Gabaldon et al., 2004). The
present results provide evidence that a muscle can activate with near maximum
power output and also near maximum efficiency. However, to vary power output,
experimental results suggest that muscles generally change the amplitude of
muscle activation (measured from EMG) more so than the timing and duration
(Hof et al., 2002
). Our
simulations, which vary the activation amplitude, suggest that the same
conditions of muscle contraction can produce maximum power output and
efficiency at different levels of activation
(Fig. 5). However, in changing
the activation level the power output invariably drops and the efficiency of
the muscle remains consistent. Therefore reducing the activation level and
maintaining similar timing and duration of activation is perhaps the best
method for modulation of power output in an efficient manner. This finding is
supported by the results of Hof
(2003
) and Hof et al.
(2002
), who examined the human
triceps surae. The effect of the relationship between activation level and
fibre type recruitment is of interest but beyond the scope of this paper.
There are certainly confounding issues in extrapolating these data outside the muscle types for which the model has been validated. For instance, each muscle has different properties, including the maximum shortening velocity, the curvature of the forcevelocity curve, the rate of activation/deactivation and basic metabolic costs. Indeed each of these factors will either increase or decrease a muscle's power-producing capabilities and efficiency. However, the relationships between power output, efficiency, optimal conditions of activation, SEE stiffness and amplitude of length change presented here provide an insight into why muscles (including the CE and the SEE) with specific architecture and function activate the way they do.
In summary, here we present a model that can be used to explore the parameter space of activation conditions that can achieve optimal power output and efficiency of muscle, and also a framework for determining the effect of SEE stiffness and length change on these optimal conditions. The results of this study show that a more compliant SEE allows the activation conditions for achieving maximum efficiency closer to that for achieving maximum power output. This is, however, length change dependent, with a compliant SEE requiring greater length change amplitude. This has implications in the design of muscle for its specific function, muscles with short muscle fibres (in comparison to the length change of the SEE) being more powerful and efficient with proportionately long amplitude length changes. In choosing the activation timing, amplitude and duration, simulations also suggest that biological systems would obtain greatest benefit by using conditions of optimal efficiency and varying the amplitude of activation to achieve the required power output.
![]() |
Acknowledgments |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Alexander, R. M. (2002). Tendon elasticity and muscle function. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 133A,1001 -1011.
Askew, G. N. and Marsh, R. L. (2002). Muscle
designed for maximum short-term power output: quail flight muscle.
J. Exp. Biol. 205,2153
-2160.
Barclay, C. J. (1994). Efficiency of fast- and
slow-twitch muscles of the mouse performing cyclic contractions. J.
Exp. Biol. 193,65
-78.
Biewener, A. A., Konieczynski, D. D. and Baudinette, R. V.
(1998). In vivo muscle forcelength behavior
during steady-speed hopping in tammar wallabies. J. Exp.
Biol. 201,1681
-1694.
Brown, N. A., Kawcak, C. E., McIlwraith, C. W. and Pandy, M. G. (2003). Architectural properties of distal forelimb muscles in horses, Equus caballus. J. Morphol. 258,106 -114.[CrossRef][Medline]
Curtin, N. and Woledge, R. (1996). Power at the
expense of efficiency in contraction of white muscle fibres from dogfish
Scyliorhinus canicula. J. Exp. Biol.
199,593
-601.
Curtin, N. A., Gardner-Medwin, A. R. and Woledge, R. C.
(1998). Predictions of the time course of force and power output
by dogfish white muscle fibres during brief tetani. J. Exp.
Biol. 201,103
-114.
Ettema, G. J. (1996). Mechanical efficiency and
efficiency of storage and release of series elastic energy in skeletal muscle
during stretchshorten cycles. J. Exp. Biol.
199,1983
-1997.
Ettema, G. J. (2001). Muscle efficiency: the controversial role of elasticity and mechanical energy conversion in stretchshortening cycles. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 85,457 -465.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fukunaga, T., Kawakami, Y., Kubo, K. and Kanehisa, H. (2002). Muscle and tendon interaction during human movements. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 30,106 -110.[CrossRef][Medline]
Gabaldon, A. M., Nelson, F. E. and Roberts, T. J.
(2004). Mechanical function of two ankle extensors in wild
turkeys: shifts from energy production to energy absorption during incline
versus decline running. J. Exp. Biol.
207,2277
-2288.
Galantis, A. and Woledge, R. C. (2003). The theoretical limits to the power output of a muscle-tendon complex with inertial and gravitational loads. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 270,1493 -1498.[CrossRef]
Gordon, A. M., Huxley, A. F. and Julian, F. J. (1966). The variation in isometric tension with sarcomere length in vertebrate muscle fibres. J. Physiol. 184,170 -192.[Medline]
Griffiths, R. I. (1991). Shortening of muscle fibres during stretch of the active cat medial gastrocnemius muscle: the role of tendon compliance. J. Physiol. 436,219 -236.[Abstract]
Hof, A. L. (2003). Muscle mechanics and neuromuscular control. J. Biomech. 36,1031 -1038.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hof, A. L., Elzinga, H., Grimmius, W. and Halbertsma, J. P. (2002). Speed dependence of averaged EMG profiles in walking. Gait Posture 16,78 -86.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lichtwark, G. A. and Wilson, A. M. (2005). A
modified Hill muscle model that predicts muscle power output and efficiency
during sinusoidal length changes. J. Exp. Biol.
208,2831
-2843.
Maganaris, C. N. and Paul, J. P. (2002). Tensile properties of the in vivo human gastrocnemius tendon. J. Biomech. 35,1639 -1646.[CrossRef][Medline]
Roberts, T. J. and Scales, J. A. (2002).
Mechanical power output during running accelerations in wild turkeys.
J. Exp. Biol. 205,1485
-1494.
Roberts, T. J. and Scales, J. A. (2004).
Adjusting muscle function to demand: joint work during acceleration in wild
turkeys. J. Exp. Biol.
207,4165
-4174.
Swanstrom, M. D., Zarucco, L., Stover, S. M., Hubbard, M., Hawkins, D. A., Driessen, B. and Steffey, E. P. (2005). Passive and active mechanical properties of the superficial and deep digital flexor muscles in the forelimbs of anesthetized Thoroughbred horses. J. Biomech. 38,579 -586.[CrossRef][Medline]
Tobalske, B. W., Hedrick, T. L., Dial, K. P. and Biewener, A. A. (2003). Comparative power curves in bird flight. Nature 421,363 -366.[CrossRef][Medline]