| Literature DB >> 17371917 |
Sam Van Wassenbergh1, Anthony Herrel, Rob S James, Peter Aerts.
Abstract
Biomechanical models are intrinsically limited in explaining the ontogenetic scaling relationships for prey capture kinematics in aquatic vertebrates because no data are available on the scaling of intrinsic contractile properties of the muscles that power feeding. However, functional insight into scaling relationships is fundamental to our understanding of the ecology, performance and evolution of animals. In this study, in vitro contractile properties of three feeding muscles were determined for a series of different sizes of African air-breathing catfishes (Clarias gariepinus). These muscles were the mouth closer musculus adductor mandibulae A2A3', the mouth opener m. protractor hyoidei and the hypaxial muscles responsible for pectoral girdle retraction. Tetanus and twitch activation rise times increased significantly with size, while latency time was size independent. In accordance with the decrease in feeding velocity with increasing size, the cycle frequency for maximal power output of the protractor hyoidei and the adductor mandibulae showed a negative scaling relationship. Theoretical modelling predicts a scaling relationship for in vivo muscle function during which these muscles always produced at least 80% of their maximal in vitro power. These findings suggest that the contractile properties of these feeding muscles are fine-tuned to the changes in biomechanical constraints of movement of the feeding apparatus during ontogeny. However, each muscle appears to have a unique set of contractile properties. The hypaxials, the most important muscle for powering suction feeding in clariid catfish, differed from the other muscles by generating higher maximal stress and mass-specific power output with increased size, whilst the optimum cycle frequency for maximal power output only decreased significantly with size in the larger adults (cranial lengths greater than 60 mm).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2007 PMID: 17371917 DOI: 10.1242/jeb.000109
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Exp Biol ISSN: 0022-0949 Impact factor: 3.312