Abstract
Feldman (1966) has proposed that a muscle endowed with its spinal reflex system behaves as a non-linear spring with an adjustable resting length. In contrast, because of the length-tension properties of muscles, many researchers have modeled them as non-linear springs with adjustable stiffness. Here we test the merits of each approach: Initially, it is proven that the adjustable stiffness model predicts that isometric muscle force and stiffness are linearly related. We show that this prediction is not supported by data on the static stiffness-force characteristics of reflexive muscles, where stiffness grows non-linearly with force. Therefore, an intact muscle-reflex system does not behave as a non-linear spring with an adjustable stiffness. However, when the same muscle is devoid of its reflexes, the data shows that stiffness grows linearly with force. We aim to understand the functional advantage of the non-linear stiffness-force relationship present in the reflexive muscle. Control of an inverted pendulum with a pair of antagonist muscles is considered. Using an active-state muscle model we describe force development in an areflexive muscle. From the data on the relationship of stiffness and force in the intact muscle we derive the length-tension properties of a reflexive muscle. It is shown that a muscle under the control of its spinal reflexes resembles a non-linear spring with an adjustable resting length. This provides independent evidence in support of the Feldman hypothesis of an adjustable resting length as the control parameter of a reflexive muscle, but it disagrees with his particular formulation. In order to maintain stability of the single joint system, we prove that a necessary condition is that muscle stiffness must grow at least linearly with force at isometric conditions. This shows that co-contraction of antagonist muscles may actually destabilize the limb if the slope of this stiffness-force relationship is less than an amount specified by the change in the moment arm of the muscle as a function of joint configuration. In a reflexive muscle where stiffness grows faster than linearly with force, co-contraction will always lead to an increase in stiffness. Furthermore, with the reflexive muscles, the same level of joint stiffness can be produced by much smaller muscle forces because of the non-linear stiffness-force relationship. This allows the joint to remain stable at a fraction of the metabolic energy cost associated with maintaining stability with areflexive muscles.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allum JHJ, Mauritz K-H, Vogele H (1982) The mechanical effectiveness of short latency reflexes in human triceps surae muscles revealed by ischaemia and vibration. Exp Brain Res 48:153–156
Asatryan DG, Feldman AG (1965) Functional tuning of the nervous system with control movement or maintenance of a steady posture — I. Mechanographic analysis of the work of the joint on execution of a postural task. Biophysics 10:925–934
Crago PE, Houk JC, Hasan Z (1976) Regulatory actions of human stretch reflex. J Neurophysiol 39:5–19
Craig JJ (1986) Introduction to robotics. Addison-Wesley, Reading Mass
Feldman AG (1966) Functional tuning of the nervous system with control of movement or maintenance of a steady posture — II. Controllable parameters of the muscles. Biophysics 11:565–578
Feldman AG (1980) Superposition of motor programs — I. Rhythmic forearm movements in man. Neuroscience 5:81–90
Feldman AG (1986) Once more on the equilibrium point hypothesis (λ model) for motor control. J Motor Behav 18:17–54
Feldman AG, Orlovsky GN (1972) The influence of different descending systems on the tonic stretch reflex in the cat. Exp Neurol 37:481–494
Gasser HS, Hill AV (1924) The dynamics of muscular contraction. Proc R Soc London 96:398–437
Ghez C (1985) Introduction to the motor systems. In: Kandel ER, Schwartz JH (eds) Principles of neural science Elsevier, New York, pp 429–456
Glantz SA (1974) A constitutive equation for the passive properties of muscle. J Biomech 7:137–145
Gordon AM, Huxley AF, Julian FJ (1966) The variation in isometric tension with sarcomere length in vertebrate muscle fibres. J Physiol 184:170–192
Greene PR, McMahon TA (1979) Reflex stiffness of man's antigravity muscles during kneebends while carrying extra weights. J Biomech 12:881–891
Hatze H (1977) A general myocybernetic control model of skeletal muscle. Biol Cybern 28:143–157
Hof AL, Van den Berg JW (1981) EMG to force processing I: an electrical analogue of the Hill muscle model. J Biomech 14:747–758
Hoffer JA, Andreassen S (1978) Factors affecting the gain of the stretch reflex and soleus stiffness in premammillary cats. Soc Neurosci (abstr) 4:935
Hoffer JA, Andreasen S (1981) Regulation of soleus muscle stiffness in premammillary cats: intrinsic and reflex components. J Neurophysiol 45:267–285
Hogan N (1984) Adaptive control of mechanical impedance by coactivation of antagonist muscles. IEEE Trans Automatic Control AC-29:681–690
Hogan N (1985) The mechanics of multi-joint posture and movement control. Biol Cybern 52:315–331
Houk JC, Rymer WZ (1981) Neural control of muscle length and tension. In: Brooks VB (ed) Handbook of physiology-nervous system II. American Physiological Society, Bethesda, MD pp 257–323
Huxley AF (1974) Muscular contraction. J Physiol 243:1–43
Inbar GF, Hsia TC, Baskin RJ (1970) Parameter identification analysis of muscle dynamics. Math Biosci 7:61–79
Inbar GF, Ginat T (1983) Effects of muscle model parameter dispersion and multi-loop segmental interaction on the neuromuscular system performance. Biol Cybern 48:69–83
Inbar GF, Adam D (1976) Estimation of muscle active state. Biol Cybern 23:61–72
Matthews PBC (1981) Evolving views on the internal operation and the functional role of the muscle spindle. J Physiol 320:1–30
McMahon TA (1984) Muscles, reflexes, and locomotion. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ
Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Giszter SF (1991) A field-approximation approach to the execution of motor plans. Int Conf Advanced Robotics, Pisa Italy pp 1200–1204
Nichols TR (1985) Autogenic reflex action in tibialis anterior compared with that in soleus muscle in the decerebrate cat. Exp Brain Res 59:232–241
Nichols TR, Houk JC (1976) Improvement in linearity and regulation of stiffness that results from actions of stretch reflex. J Neurophysiol 39:119–142
Pansky B (1979) Review of gross anatomy, 4th edn. Macmillan, New York
Rack PMH, Westbury DR (1969) The effects of length and stimulus rate on tension in the isometric cat soleus muscle. J Physiol 204:443–460
Ramon CF, Stark L (1987) Simulation studies of descending and reflex control of fast movements. J Motor Behav 19:38–62
Shadmehr R (1991a) Actuator and kinematic redundancy in biological motor control. In: Arbib MA, Ewert J-P (eds) Visual structures and integrated functions. Springer, New York Berlin Heidelberg, pp 239–254
Shadmehr R (1991b) A computational theory for control of posture and movement in a multi-joint limb. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Southern California, Technical Report 91–07 of Center for Neural Engingeering, U.S.C., Los Angeles, CA, USA
Stern JT (1974) Computer modelling of gross muscle dynamics. J Biomech 7:411–428
Vincken MH, Gielen CCAM, Denier van der Gon JJ (1983) Intrinsic and afferent components in apparent muscle stiffness in man. Neuroscience 9:529–534
Winters JM, Stark L (1985) Analysis of fundamental human movement patterns through the use of in-depth antagonistic muscle models. IEEE Trans Biomed Engin BME-32:826–839
Winters JM, Stark L (1987) Muscle models: what is gained and what is lost by varying model complexity. Biol Cybern 55:403–420
Zheng YF, Hemami H, Stokes BT (1984) Muscle dynamics, size principle, and stability. IEEE Trans Biomedical Eng BME 31:489–497
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work was supported in part by grant no. 1R01 NS 24926 from the NIH (Michael Arbib, PI). R.S. was supported by an IBM Graduate Fellowship in Computer Science
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shadmehr, R., Arbib, M.A. A mathematical analysis of the force-stiffness characteristics of muscles in control of a single joint system. Biol. Cybern. 66, 463–477 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00204111
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00204111