Journal of Applied Physiology Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Appl Physiol 64: 620-626, 1988;
8750-7587/88 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
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 PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Jiang, T. X.
Right arrow Articles by Decramer, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Jiang, T. X.
Right arrow Articles by Decramer, M.

Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol 64, Issue 2 620-626, Copyright © 1988 by American Physiological Society

ARTICLES

Mechanical coupling of upper and lower canine rib cages and its functional significance

T. X. Jiang, M. Demedts and M. Decramer
Respiratory Division, Academic Hospital, Pellenberg, Belgium.

We studied rib cage distortability and reexamined the mechanical action of the diaphragm and the rib cage muscles in six supine anesthetized dogs by measuring changes in upper rib cage cross-sectional area (Aurc) and changes in lower rib cage cross-sectional area (Alrc) and the respective pressures acting on them. During quiet breathing in the intact animal the rib cage behaved as a unit (Aurc: 14.6 +/- 7.9 vs. Alrc: 15.1 +/- 9.6%), whereas considerable distortions of the rib cage occurred during breathing after bilateral phrenicotomy (Aurc: 21.0 +/- 5.1 vs. Alrc: 7.0 +/- 4.8%). These distortions were even more pronounced during phrenic nerve stimulation and separate stimulation of the costal and crural parts of the diaphragm (e.g., phrenic nerve stimulation; Aurc: -7.1 +/- 5.1 vs. Alrc: 6.9 +/- 3.5%). During the latter maneuvers the upper rib cage deflated along the relationship between upper rib cage dimensions and pleural pressure obtained during passive deflation, whereas the lower rib cage inflated close to the relationship between lower rib cage dimensions and abdominal pressure obtained during passive inflation. The latter relationship is expected to differ between costal and crural stimulation, since costal action has both an appositional and insertional component and crural action only has an appositional component. The difference between costal and crural stimulation, however, was relatively small, and the slopes were only slightly steeper for the costal than for the crural stimulation (2.9 +/- 1.2 vs. 2.2 +/- 1.0%.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Physiol. Rev.Home page
A. De Troyer, P. A. Kirkwood, and T. A. Wilson
Respiratory Action of the Intercostal Muscles
Physiol Rev, April 1, 2005; 85(2): 717 - 756.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online