QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

First published online May 18, 2006
Journal of Experimental Biology 209, 2224-2237 (2006)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2006
doi: 10.1242/jeb.02236

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Carrier, D. R. Articles by Fischbein, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Carrier, D. R. Articles by Fischbein, T.

Locomotor function of the pectoral girdle `muscular sling' in trotting dogs

David R. Carrier^*, Stephen M. Deban and Timna Fischbein

Department of Biology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA

View larger version (26K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Illustration of the muscular sling of the pectoral girdle of therian mammals. (A) Schematic representation of the three primary components of the muscular sling. Muscles are represented by solid and broken lines, and labeled in black type; bones are labeled in grey type. Modified from (Davis, 1949). (B) Lateral view of the m. serratus ventralis muscle showing position of the electrodes in, the m. serratus ventralis cervicalis (i), m. serratus ventralis thoracis (ii) and the m. rhomboideus thoracis (iii). (C) Ventral view of the m. pectoralis muscle showing the position of the electrodes in, the m. pectoralis superficialis transverses (iv) and m. pectoralis profundus (v).

View larger version (25K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2. Mean normalized EMGs from six dogs trotting with 12% of body mass carried in a backpack located over their pectoral girdle (i.e. anterior-trunk loading manipulation). For each muscle, the black line represents the average EMG when the dogs trotted on the level without added mass (control) and the grey line represents the average EMG when the dogs carried the added mass. For each dog, the trotting speed was the same during the control and added mass trials. The error bars are the s.e.m. for each sampling bin.

View larger version (44K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3. Mean normalized EMGs from six dogs trotting uphill and downhill on an incline of 14° to the horizontal (i.e. fore-aft force manipulation). For each muscle, the black line represents the average EMG when the dogs trotted on the level (control) and the grey line represents the average EMG when the dogs trotted on the incline. For each dog, the trotting speed was the same during the control and incline trials. The error bars are the s.e.m. for each sampling bin.

View larger version (30K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Mean normalized EMGs from six dogs trotting with 2% of body mass added to each wrist (i.e. distal limb mass manipulation). For each muscle, the black line represents the average EMG when the dogs trotted on the level (control) and the grey line represents the average EMG when the dogs trotted with the added mass attached to the distal forelimbs. For each dog, the trotting speed was the same during the control and added mass trials. The error bars are the s.e.m. for each sampling bin.