Premium
Slow‐tonic muscle fibers and their potential innervation in the turtle, Pseudemys ( Trachemys ) scripta elegans
Author(s) -
Callister Robert J.,
Pierce Patricia A.,
McDonagh Jennifer C.,
Stuart Douglas G.
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
journal of morphology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.652
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1097-4687
pISSN - 0362-2525
DOI - 10.1002/jmor.10318
Subject(s) - tonic (physiology) , biology , myosin , oxidative phosphorylation , anatomy , myosin atpase , myofibril , oxidative enzyme , motor unit , glycolysis , gastrocnemius muscle , medicine , endocrinology , atpase , biochemistry , skeletal muscle , metabolism , enzyme
A description is provided of the ratio of slow‐tonic vs. slow‐ and fast‐twitch fibers for five muscles in the adult turtle, Pseudemys (Trachemys) scripta elegans . The cross‐sectional area of each fiber type and an estimation of the relative (weighted) cross‐sectional area occupied by the different fiber types are also provided. Two hindlimb muscles (flexor digitorum longus, FDL; external gastrocnemius, EG) were selected on the basis of their suitability for future motor‐unit studies. Three neck muscles (the fourth head of testo‐cervicis, TeC4; the fourth head of retrahens capitus collique, RCCQ4; transversalis cervicis, TrC) were chosen for their progressively decreasing oxidative capacity. Serial sections were stained for myosin adenosine triphosphatase (ATPase), NADH‐diaphorase, and alpha‐glycerophosphate dehydrogenase (α‐GPDH). Conventional fiber‐type classification was then performed using indirect markers for contraction speed and oxidative (aerobic) vs. glycolytic (anaerobic) metabolism: i.e., slow oxidative (SO, including slow‐twitch and possibly slow‐tonic fibers), fast‐twitch, oxidative‐glycolytic (FOG), and fast‐twitch glycolytic (Fg) fibers. Slow‐tonic fibers in the SO class were then revealed by directing the monoclonal antibody, ALD‐58 (raised against the slow‐tonic fiber myosin heavy chain of chicken anterior latissimus dorsi), to additional muscle cross sections. All five of the tested muscles contained the four fiber types, with the ATPase‐stained fibers including both slow‐tonic and slow‐twitch fibers. The extreme distributions of SO fibers were in the predominately glycolytic TrC vs. the predominately oxidative TeC4 muscle (TrC–SO, 9%; FOG, 20%; Fg, 71% vs. TeC4–SO, 58%: FOG, 16%; Fg, 25%). Across the five muscles, the relative prevalence of slow‐tonic fibers (4–47%) paralleled that of the SO fibers (9–58%). TeC4 had the highest prevalence of slow‐tonic fibers (47%). The test muscles exhibited varying degrees of regional concentration of each fiber type, with the distribution of slow‐tonic fibers paralleling that of the SO fibers. In the five test muscles, fiber cross‐sectional area was usually ranked Fg > FOG > SO, and slow‐twitch always > slow‐tonic. In terms of weighted cross‐sectional area, which provides a coarse‐grain measure of each fiber type's potential contribution to whole muscle force, all five muscles exhibited a higher Fg and lower SO contribution to cross‐sectional area than suggested by their corresponding fiber‐type prevalence. This was also the case for the slow‐twitch vs. slow‐tonic fibers. We conclude that slow‐tonic fibers are widespread in turtle muscle. The weighted cross‐sectional area evidence suggested, however, that their contribution to force generation is minor except in highly oxidative muscles, with a special functional role, like TeC4. There is discussion of: 1) the relationship between the present results and previous work on homologous neck and hindlimb muscles in other nonmammalian species, and 2) the potential motoneuronal innervation of slow‐tonic fibers in turtle hindlimb muscles. J. Morphol. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.