Mechanical analysis of heterogenic inhibition between soleus muscle and the pretibial flexors in the cat.
Mechanical analysis of heterogenic inhibition between soleus muscle and the pretibial flexors in the cat.
复制标题
猫比目鱼肌和胫前屈肌之间异质抑制的机械分析。
DOI：
10.1152/jn.1991.66.4.1139
复制
发表时间：
1991
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Koffler-Smulevitz,D
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Nichols,TR;Koffler-Smulevitz,D
1.本体感受通路的作用，连接直接拮抗比目鱼肌（S）和胫骨前肌（TA）肌肉在管理的机械性能的踝关节的去大脑猫。这些异源通路的行动进行了比较与S和趾长伸肌（EDL），肌肉，也作用于跖趾关节。这些神经介导的S和TA或EDL之间的相互作用进行了研究，通过施加控制长度的变化，这些肌肉对孤立的肌腱，并记录所产生的力的变化。使用电诱发的交叉伸展反射、屈曲反射和脑干刺激来激活肌肉。2.无论S最初是静止的还是通过交叉延伸反射激活的，TA或EDL对S的异源抑制都很发达。这种抑制作用持续到TA或EDL伸展的持续时间。在交叉伸展反射中，TA不产生背景力，但可以获得短暂的牵张反射。在屈反射时，S的牵拉反射通常被取消，从S到TA的异源性抑制很弱或不存在。3.对S的异源抑制作用的强弱取决于TA和EDL的起始长度和激活水平。屈肌长度或激活水平本身的变化并不改变S.即使考虑到抑制强度随起始肌肉初始状态的变化，从TA到S的抑制强度也比反过来强。4. TA和EDL对S的异源性抑制的贡献是独立的，即这些成分彼此线性相加，并与S的自生反射线性相加。此外，对于S中低到中等水平的初始力，从TA到S的抑制幅度与拉伸幅度成正比。抑制出现影响的机械反应的S基本上一样快，在这肌肉的牵张反射。5.从TA到S的异源性抑制被减少或取消的士的宁静脉注射，但不受印防己毒素或荷包牡丹碱注射。这些结果，连同观察到的抑制总和与牵张反射线性，表明这种异质性抑制的机制是甘氨酸和突触后，因此，可能包括IA-双突触相互抑制。（400字处截断摘要）
1. The role of proprioceptive pathways linking the direct antagonists soleus (S) and tibialis anterior (TA) muscles in governing the mechanical properties of the ankle joint were studied in the decerebrate cat. Actions of these heterogenic pathways were compared with those between S and extensor digitorum longus (EDL), a muscle that also acts at the metatarsophalangeal joint. These neurally mediated interactions between S and either TA or EDL were studied by applying controlled length changes to the isolated tendons of pairs of these muscles and recording the resulting changes in force. The muscles were activated with the use of electrically evoked crossed-extension reflexes, flexion reflexes, and brain stem stimulation. 2. Heterogenic inhibition from TA or EDL onto S was well developed whether S was initially quiescent or activated by a crossed-extension reflex. The inhibition persisted for the duration of the stretch of TA or EDL. During a crossed-extension reflex, TA did not generate background force, but brief stretch reflexes could be obtained. During flexion reflexes, stretch reflexes in S were usually abolished, and heterogenic inhibition from S to TA was weak or absent. 3. The strength of the heterogenic inhibition onto S was dependent on the initial length and activation level of TA and EDL. Changes in flexor length or activation level per se did not alter the background force or strength of the stretch reflex in S. Even taking into account the variation of strength of inhibition with the initial state of the muscle of origin, the strength of the inhibition was stronger from TA to S than the other way around. 4. The contributions of heterogenic inhibition from TA and EDL to S were independent in the sense that these components summed linearly with each other and with the autogenic reflex in S. In addition, the magnitude of the inhibition from TA to S was proportional to the amplitude of stretch for low to intermediate levels of initial force in S. The inhibition appeared to affect the mechanical responses of S essentially as rapidly as the stretch reflex in this muscle. 5. The heterogenic inhibition from TA to S was reduced or abolished by intravenous injections of strychnine but unaffected by injections of picrotoxin or bicuculline. These results, together with the observation that the inhibition sums linearly with the stretch reflex, suggest that the mechanism of this heterogenic inhibition is glycinergic and postsynaptic and, therefore, may include Ia-disynaptic reciprocal inhibition.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)