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


     


J Appl Physiol 99: 389-396, 2005; doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00207.2005
8750-7587/05 $8.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
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
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI 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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (17)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Maluf, K. S.
Right arrow Articles by Enoka, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Maluf, K. S.
Right arrow Articles by Enoka, R. M.

INVITED REVIEW

Task failure during fatiguing contractions performed by humans

Katrina S. Maluf and Roger M. Enoka

Department of Integrative Physiology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado

By comparing the physiological adjustments that occur when two similar fatiguing contractions are performed to failure, it is possible to identify mechanisms that limit the duration of the more difficult task. This approach has been used to study two fatiguing contractions, referred to as the force and position tasks, which differed in the type of feedback given to the subject and the amount of support provided by the surroundings. Even though the two tasks required a similar net muscle torque during submaximal isometric contractions, the duration that the position task could be sustained was consistently much briefer than that for the force task. The position task involved a greater rate of increase in EMG activity and more marked changes in motor unit recruitment and rate coding compared with the force task. These observations are consistent with the hypothesis that the motor unit pool was recruited more rapidly during the position task. The difference in motor unit behavior appeared to be caused by variation in synaptic input, likely involving heightened sensitivity of the stretch reflex during the position task. Upon repeat performances of the two fatiguing contractions, some subjects were able to increase the time to failure for the force task but not the position task. Furthermore, the time to failure for the position task could be influenced by the postural demands associated with maintaining the position of the limb, and the difference in the two durations was enhanced when the postural activity evoked a pressor response. These observations indicate that the difference in the duration of the two fatiguing contractions was attributable to differences in the control strategy used to sustain the tasks and the magnitude of the associated postural activity.

muscle fatigue; maximal force capacity; motor unit; reflexes; posture



Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: R. M. Enoka, Dept. of Integrative Physiology, Univ. of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309-0354 (E-mail: enoka{at}colorado.edu)




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Neurorehabil Neural RepairHome page
B. H. Dobkin
Fatigue Versus Activity-Dependent Fatigability in Patients With Central or Peripheral Motor Impairments
Neurorehabil Neural Repair, April 1, 2008; 22(2): 105 - 110.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
M. Klass, M. Levenez, R. M. Enoka, and J. Duchateau
Spinal Mechanisms Contribute to Differences in the Time to Failure of Submaximal Fatiguing Contractions Performed With Different Loads
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2008; 99(3): 1096 - 1104.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
J. L. Taylor and S. C. Gandevia
A comparison of central aspects of fatigue in submaximal and maximal voluntary contractions
J Appl Physiol, February 1, 2008; 104(2): 542 - 550.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Physiol.Home page
R. M. Enoka and J. Duchateau
Muscle fatigue: what, why and how it influences muscle function
J. Physiol., January 1, 2008; 586(1): 11 - 23.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Integr. Comp. Biol.Home page
B. K. Barry and R. M. Enoka
The neurobiology of muscle fatigue: 15 years later
Integr. Comp. Biol., October 1, 2007; 47(4): 465 - 473.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
T. Rudroff, B. K. Barry, A. L. Stone, C. J. Barry, and R. M. Enoka
Accessory muscle activity contributes to the variation in time to task failure for different arm postures and loads
J Appl Physiol, March 1, 2007; 102(3): 1000 - 1006.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Sports. Med.Home page
J P Weir, T W Beck, J T Cramer, T J Housh, T D Noakes, A St Clair Gibson, and E V Lambert
Is fatigue all in your head? A critical review of the central governor model * Commentary.
Br. J. Sports Med., July 1, 2006; 40(7): 573 - 586.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
S. C. Gandevia and J. L. Taylor
Supraspinal fatigue: the effects of caffeine on human muscle performance
J Appl Physiol, June 1, 2006; 100(6): 1749 - 1750.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Appl. Physiol.Home page
J. M. Kalmar and E. Cafarelli
Central excitability does not limit postfatigue voluntary activation of quadriceps femoris
J Appl Physiol, June 1, 2006; 100(6): 1757 - 1764.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
C. J. Mottram, K. S. Maluf, J. L. Stephenson, M. K. Anderson, and R. M. Enoka
Prolonged Vibration of the Biceps Brachii Tendon Reduces Time to Failure When Maintaining Arm Position With a Submaximal Load
J Neurophysiol, February 1, 2006; 95(2): 1185 - 1193.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2005 by the American Physiological Society.