Am J Physiol Cell Physiol Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 253: C599-C606, 1987;
0363-6143/87 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bozler, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bozler, E.

AJP - Cell Physiology, Vol 253, Issue 4 C599-C606, Copyright © 1987 by American Physiological Society


ARTICLES

Mechanics of tonus fibers of frog muscle

E. Bozler
Department of Physiology, Ohio State University, Columbus 43210.

Contractions with two phases of relaxation are induced by brief strong stimulation in some frog muscles. The first phase with rapid relaxation is produced by the twitch fibers; the second phase, which is very slow and is only present after strong stimulation, represents the relaxation of the tonus fibers. At moderate loads, half time of isotonic relaxation of these fibers is as long as 30 min at 2 degrees C, but the rate varies with the load and depends on the condition of the frogs. With regard to the rate of relaxation, the tonus fibers resemble molluscan catch muscles. In tonus fibers, rapid isotonic and isometric relaxation can be induced by a small extension; shortening opposes this effect. These responses are like the length responses previously found in various types of striated muscle. They go in the same direction as the well-known metabolic effects of length changes (Fenn effect). After a large extension by an increase in load there is no active shortening when the load is returned to the previous value. This and other observations show that the slowness of relaxation is not due to sustained activity, but is determined by the strength of the contractile bonds formed during contraction. Because activity during relaxation is very low, it is unlikely that length responses are caused by a modification of the cross-bridge cycle. It is suggested that length changes act through a mechanism that is separate from that initiating contraction, but alters the speed of relaxation by making the cross bridges weaker or stronger.





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