Journal of Applied Physiology Watch the video to learn how APS reaches out to developing nations.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Appl Physiol 105: 1428-1440, 2008. First published August 21, 2008; doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.90571.2008
8750-7587/08 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
105/5/1428    most recent
90571.2008v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bobbert, M. F.
Right arrow Articles by Jaspers, R. T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bobbert, M. F.
Right arrow Articles by Jaspers, R. T.

Humans adjust control to initial squat depth in vertical squat jumping

Maarten F. Bobbert, L. J. Richard Casius, Igor W. T. Sijpkens, and Richard T. Jaspers

Research Institute MOVE, Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Submitted 25 April 2008 ; accepted in final form 15 August 2008

The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the control strategy that humans use in jumping. Eight male gymnasts performed vertical squat jumps from five initial postures that differed in squat depth (P1–P5) while kinematic data, ground reaction forces, and electromyograms (EMGs) of leg muscles were collected; the latter were rectified and smoothed to obtain SREMGs. P3 was the preferred initial posture; in P1, P2, P4, and P5 height of the mass center was +13, +7, –7 and –14 cm, respectively, relative to that in P3. Furthermore, maximum-height jumps from the initial postures observed in the subjects were simulated with a model comprising four body segments and six Hill-type muscles. The only input was the onset of stimulation of each of the muscles (Stim). The subjects were able to perform well-coordinated squat jumps from all postures. Peak SREMG levels did not vary among P1–P5, but SREMG onset of plantarflexors occurred before that of gluteus maximus in P1 and >90 ms after that in P5 (P < 0.05). In the simulation study, similar systematic shifts occurred in Stim onsets across the optimal control solutions for jumps from P1–P5. Because the adjustments in SREMG onsets to initial posture observed in the subjects were very similar to the adjustments in optimal Stim onsets of the model, it was concluded that the SREMG adjustments were functional, in the sense that they contributed to achieving the greatest jump height possible from each initial posture. For the model, we were able to develop a mapping from initial posture to Stim onsets that generated successful jumps from P1–P5. It appears that to explain how subjects adjust their control to initial posture there is no need to assume that the brain contains an internal dynamics model of the musculoskeletal system.

coordination; optimal control; simulation model; control strategy


Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: M. F. Bobbert, Research Institute MOVE, Faculty of Human Movement Sciences, VU Univ. Amsterdam, Van der Boechorstraat 9, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands (e-mail: m_f_bobbert{at}fbw.vu.nl)






HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the American Physiological Society.