PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 9320426

Axial muscle function during lizard locomotion

Abstract

It was recently reported that the epaxial muscles of a lizard, Varanus salvator, function to stabilize the trunk during locomotion, and it was suggested that this stabilizing role may be a shared derived feature of amniotes. This result was unexpected because it had previously been assumed that the epaxial muscles of lizards function to produce lateral bending during locomotion and that only in mammals and birds were the epaxial muscles active in stabilizing the trunk. These results and the inferences made from them lead to two questions. (1) Is the pattern of epaxial muscle activity observed in V. salvator representative of a basal lizard condition or is it a derived condition that evolved within lizards? (2) If the epaxial muscles do not produce lateral bending, which muscles do carry out this function? These questions were addressed by collecting synchronous electromyographic (EMG) and kinematic data from two lizard species during walking and running. EMG data were collected from the epaxial muscles of a lizard species from a basal clade, Iguana iguana, in order to address the first question. EMG data were collected from the hypaxial muscles of both Iguana iguana and Varanus salvator to address the second question. The timing of epaxial muscle activity in Iguana iguana relative to the kinematics of limb support and lateral trunk bending is similar to that observed in Varanus salvator, a finding that supports the hypothesis that the epaxial muscles stabilize the trunk during locomotion in lizards and that this stabilizing role is a basal feature of lizards. Therefore, a stabilizing function of the epaxial muscles is most parsimoniously interpreted as a basal amniote feature. In both Iguana iguana and Varanus salvator, the activity of two of the hypaxial muscles, the external oblique and rectus abdominis, is appropriately timed for the production of lateral bending. This indicates that elements of the hypaxial musculature, not the epaxial musculature, are the primary lateral bending muscles of lizards.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

D Ritter. 1996. Axial muscle function during lizard locomotion. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.199.11.2499

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Effectiveness of high-dose versus standard-dose influenza vaccines against hospitalisation according to frailty risk: a prespecified analysis of the randomised trial DANFLU-2.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a major risk factor for influenza-related complications and can influence vaccine effectiveness. We aimed to assess the relative vaccine effectiveness (rVE) of high-dose (HD-IIV) versus standard-dose inactivated influenza vaccine (SD-IIV) in older adults aged 65 years or older according to frailty risk. METHODS: This study was a prespecified analysis of DANFLU-2, an open-label, individually randomised trial, conducted in Denmark during three consecutive influenza seasons (2022-23, 2023-24, and 2024-25). Adults aged 65 years or older were randomised (1:1) to the HD-IIV or SD-IIV group. The primary endpoint was hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia. Frailty was defined according to the validated Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) based on ICD-10 codes within 10 years before randomisation. Participants were stratified into three HFRS categories, namely low (<5 points), intermediate (5-15 points), and high (>15 points) frailty risk. The rVE of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint was assessed across prespecified HFRS categories and treating HFRS as a continuous variable. Pearson's chi-square test was used to compare safety events across frailty risk groups and randomisation groups. FINDINGS: Among 332&#x2009;438 randomised participants (mean age 73&#xb7;7 years [SD 5&#xb7;8]; 161&#x2009;538 [48&#xb7;6%] were female), 276&#x2009;173 (83&#xb7;1%) had low frailty risk, 52&#x2009;395 (15&#xb7;8%) had intermediate frailty risk, and 3861 (1&#xb7;2%) had high frailty risk. The primary endpoint of hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia occurred in 1424 (0&#xb7;5%) of 276&#x2009;173 participants with low frailty risk, 761 (1&#xb7;5%) of 52&#x2009;395 with intermediate frailty risk, and 163 (4&#xb7;2%) of 3861 with high frailty risk (relative risk [RR] for intermediate vs low frailty risk 2&#xb7;8 [95% CI 2&#xb7;6-3&#xb7;1]; RR for high vs low frailty risk 8&#xb7;2 [7&#xb7;0-9&#xb7;6]). HFRS as a continuous variable significantly modified the effect of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against the primary endpoint with higher rVE estimates with increasing HFRS (pinteraction=0&#xb7;020). The rVE was 0&#xb7;2% (95% CI -10&#xb7;8 to 10&#xb7;2) among those with low frailty risk, 13&#xb7;1% (-0&#xb7;4 to 24&#xb7;8) among those with intermediate frailty risk, and 19&#xb7;9% (-10&#xb7;3 to 42&#xb7;1) among those with high frailty risk. No significant interaction was observed when HFRS was assessed according to the prespecified categorical frailty groups (pinteraction=0&#xb7;17). The proportion of participants with at least one serious adverse event increased across frailty risk groups (13&#x2009;366 [4&#xb7;8%] of 275&#x2009;795 for low frailty risk, 5475 [10&#xb7;5%] of 52&#x2009;315 for intermediate frailty risk, and 777 [20&#xb7;2%] of 3850 for high frailty risk; p<0&#xb7;0001), with similar proportions of serious adverse events in the HD-IIV and SD-IIV groups for each frailty risk group. INTERPRETATION: Among adults aged 65 years or older in Denmark, frailty risk might modify the effects of HD-IIV versus SD-IIV against hospitalisation for influenza or pneumonia, with higher rVE estimates with increasing frailty risk. These findings might support considering high-dose influenza vaccines for frail older adults. However, effect modification was not evident when frailty was assessed using prespecified categorical subgroups, and subgroup-specific estimates were imprecise, with 95% CIs crossing the null. These results should be considered exploratory, warranting further investigation. FUNDING: The DANFLU-2 trial was funded by Sanofi.

Journal Article↗