European journal of applied physiology · 2025
The role of the bone myoregulation reflex in impact-loading activities: a new view of feedback control mechanisms.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kalaoglu Eser, Yildiz Nilgun, Sezikli Selim, Ozkan Ismet Alkim, Karacan Ilhan, Türker Kemal Sitki
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The short-latency reflex (SLR), which occurs immediately after ground contact during jumping, is traditionally attributed to a muscle spindle-mediated stretch reflex, with a longer latency explained by slow muscle stretching. However, emerging evidence suggests that the bone myoregulation reflex (BMR) may provide a more physiologically parsimonious and biomechanically integrated explanation for this response.
OBJECTIVES: This study compared the latencies of these reflexes and assessed the mechanical stimulus transmission delay to the muscle during impact.
METHODS: Two experiments were performed in healthy adults. Experiment 1 measured the soleus tendon reflex (T-reflex), SLR, and BMR latencies via surface electromyography (EMG). Experiment 2 recorded delays from the mechanical stimulus to the muscle belly using intramuscular EMG.
RESULTS: The median latencies in Experiment 1 were 35.0 ms (T-reflex), 45.8 ms (SLR), and 43.0 ms (BMR). The SLR and BMR latencies were significantly longer than the T-reflex latencies (p = 3.6 × 10⁻11). There was no difference between the SLR and BMR. Experiment 2 showed mechanical transmission delays of 4.31 ms (tendon stretch), 3.31 ms (tap), and 2.83 ms (whole-body vibration), without significant differences. The ~ 11 ms longer SLR latency than the T-reflex cannot be explained by slow muscle stretching. Normalized soleus EMG signals during landing (feedforward) were positively correlated with the SLR amplitude (feedback) (r = 0.554, p = 0.0003).
CONCLUSION: The latency characteristics of the SLR suggest that it more closely resembles the BMR than the classical stretch reflex does. It is speculated that as a bone-protective mechanism, BMR may underlie reflexive muscle contractions that deliver load-induced protective feedback during impact, potentially preserving both bone and muscle-tendon integrity.
OBJECTIVES: This study compared the latencies of these reflexes and assessed the mechanical stimulus transmission delay to the muscle during impact.
METHODS: Two experiments were performed in healthy adults. Experiment 1 measured the soleus tendon reflex (T-reflex), SLR, and BMR latencies via surface electromyography (EMG). Experiment 2 recorded delays from the mechanical stimulus to the muscle belly using intramuscular EMG.
RESULTS: The median latencies in Experiment 1 were 35.0 ms (T-reflex), 45.8 ms (SLR), and 43.0 ms (BMR). The SLR and BMR latencies were significantly longer than the T-reflex latencies (p = 3.6 × 10⁻11). There was no difference between the SLR and BMR. Experiment 2 showed mechanical transmission delays of 4.31 ms (tendon stretch), 3.31 ms (tap), and 2.83 ms (whole-body vibration), without significant differences. The ~ 11 ms longer SLR latency than the T-reflex cannot be explained by slow muscle stretching. Normalized soleus EMG signals during landing (feedforward) were positively correlated with the SLR amplitude (feedback) (r = 0.554, p = 0.0003).
CONCLUSION: The latency characteristics of the SLR suggest that it more closely resembles the BMR than the classical stretch reflex does. It is speculated that as a bone-protective mechanism, BMR may underlie reflexive muscle contractions that deliver load-induced protective feedback during impact, potentially preserving both bone and muscle-tendon integrity.