Literature DB >> 16351948

Motor pattern control for increasing crushing force in the striped burrfish (Chilomycterus schoepfi).

Wyatt L Korff1, Peter C Wainwright.   

Abstract

The relationship between muscular force modulation and the underlying nervous system control signals has been difficult to quantify for in vivo animal systems. Our goal was to understand how animals alter muscle activation patterns to increase bite forces and to evaluate how accurate these patterns are in predicting crushing forces. We examined the relationship between commonly used measures of cranial muscle activity and force production during feeding events of the striped burrfish (Chilomycterus schoepfi), a mollusc crushing specialist. We quantified the force required to crush a common gastropod prey item (Littorina irrorata) of burrfish using a materials testing device. Burrfish were fed these calibrated prey items while we recorded electromyograms (EMGs) from the main jaw closing muscles (adductor mandibulae A1beta, A2alpha, and A2beta). We quantified EMG activity by measuring the burst duration, rectified integrated area, and then calculated the intensity of activity from these two variables. Least squares regressions relating force to crush (Fcrush) and all EMG variables were calculated for each fish. Multiple regression analyses were used to determine how much of the variation in Fcrush could be explained by muscle activation patterns. We found that 20 cm burrfish are capable of generating extremely high crushing forces (380 N peak force) primarily by increasing the duration of muscle activity. EMG variables explained 71% of the total variation in force production. After accounting for the inherent variation in Fcrush of snails, EMGs do a very good job of predicting bite forces for these fish.

Entities:  

Year:  2004        PMID: 16351948     DOI: 10.1016/j.zool.2004.09.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zoology (Jena)        ISSN: 0944-2006            Impact factor:   2.240


  7 in total

1.  Replicated divergence in cichlid radiations mirrors a major vertebrate innovation.

Authors:  Matthew D McGee; Brant C Faircloth; Samuel R Borstein; Jimmy Zheng; C Darrin Hulsey; Peter C Wainwright; Michael E Alfaro
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-01-13       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Do constructional constraints influence cichlid craniofacial diversification?

Authors:  C D Hulsey; M C Mims; J T Streelman
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2007-08-07       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Always chew your food: freshwater stingrays use mastication to process tough insect prey.

Authors:  Matthew A Kolmann; Kenneth C Welch; Adam P Summers; Nathan R Lovejoy
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-09-14       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Feeding biomechanics of the cownose ray, Rhinoptera bonasus, over ontogeny.

Authors:  Matthew A Kolmann; Daniel R Huber; Philip J Motta; R Dean Grubbs
Journal:  J Anat       Date:  2015-07-16       Impact factor: 2.610

5.  Hard prey, soft jaws and the ontogeny of feeding mechanics in the spotted ratfish Hydrolagus colliei.

Authors:  Daniel R Huber; Mason N Dean; Adam P Summers
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2008-08-06       Impact factor: 4.118

6.  Pinching forces in crayfish and fiddler crabs, and comparisons with the closing forces of other animals.

Authors:  Dennis L Claussen; Gary W Gerald; John E Kotcher; Courtney A Miskell
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2007-12-07       Impact factor: 2.200

7.  Neogene Proto-Caribbean porcupinefishes (Diodontidae).

Authors:  Orangel Aguilera; Guilherme Oliveira Andrade Silva; Ricardo Tadeu Lopes; Alessandra Silveira Machado; Thaís Maria Dos Santos; Gabriela Marques; Thayse Bertucci; Thayanne Aguiar; Jorge Carrillo-Briceño; Felix Rodriguez; Carlos Jaramillo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.