A three filament mechanistic model of musculotendon force and impedance

  1. Institute for Sport and Movement Science, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  2. Institute of Engineering and Computational Mechanics, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg, Germany
  3. Neuromuscular Diagnostics, Department of Sport and Health Sciences, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
  4. Munich School of Robotics and Machine Intelligence (MIRMI), Technical University of Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
  5. Munich Data Science Institute (MDSI), Technical University of Munich, Munich, Bavaria, Germany
  6. Human Performance Laboratory, Faculty of Kinesiology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Peer review process

Not revised: This Reviewed Preprint includes the authors’ original preprint (without revision), an eLife assessment, and public reviews.

Read more about eLife’s peer review process.

Editors

  • Reviewing Editor
    Eric Tytell
    Tufts University
  • Senior Editor
    Aleksandra Walczak
    École Normale Supérieure - PSL, Paris, France

Reviewer #1 (Public Review):

Muscle models are important tools in the fields of biomechanics and physiology. Muscle models serve a wide variety of functions, including validating existing theories, testing new hypotheses, and predicting forces produced by humans and animals in health and disease. This paper attempts to provide an alternative to Hill-type muscle models that includes contributions of titin to force enhancement over multiple time scales. Due to the significant limitations of Hill-type models, alternative models are needed and therefore the work is important and timely.

The effort to include a role for titin in muscle models is a major strength of the methods and results. The results clearly demonstrate the weaknesses of Hill models and the advantages of incorporating titin into theoretical treatments of muscle mechanics. Another strength is to address muscle mechanics over a large range of time scales. Weaknesses include the decision to use a MTU model to simulate experiments from single muscle fibers, and failure to systematically address the limitations of the model, including equations for activation dynamics with no length dependence. It would also be useful for readers if the authors provided a discussion of the types of data that can be simulated using the model, along with potential pitfalls and how to determine model parameters.

The authors succeed in demonstrating the need to incorporate titin in muscle models. However, it remains unclear whether it will be practical for others to use this particular model for different types of data. Several ad hoc modifications were described in the paper, and the degree to which the model requires parameter optimization for different muscles, preparations and experiment types is also unclear.

Reviewer #2 (Public Review):

This model of skeletal muscle includes springs and dampers which aim to capture the effect of crossbridge and titin stiffness during the stretch of active muscle. While both crossbridge and titin stiffness have previously been incorporated, in some form, into models, this model is the first to simultaneously include both. The authors suggest that this will allow for the prediction of muscle force in response to short-, mid- and long-range stretches. All these types of stretch are likely to be experienced by muscle during in vivo perturbations, and are known to elicit different muscle responses. Hence, it is valuable to have a single model which can predict muscle force under all these physiologically relevant conditions. In addition, this model dramatically simplifies sarcomere structure to enable this muscle model to be used in multi-muscle simulations of whole-body movement.

In order to test this model, its force predictions are compared to 3 sets of experimental data which focus on short-, mid- and long-range perturbations, and to the predictions of a Hill-type muscle model. The choice of data sets is excellent and provide a robust test of the model's ability to predict forces over a range of length perturbations. However, I find the comparison to a Hill-type muscle model to be somewhat limiting. It is well established that Hill-type models do not have any mechanism by which they can predict the effect of active muscle stretch. Hence, that the model proposed here represents an improvement over such a model is not a surprise. Many other models, some of which are also simple enough to be incorporated into whole-body simulations, have incorporated mechanistic elements which allow for the prediction of force responses to muscle stretch. It is not clear from the results presented here that this model would outperform such models.

The paper begins by outlining the phenomenological vs mechanistic approaches taken to muscle modelling, historically. It appears, although is not directly specified, that this model combines these approaches. A somewhat mechanistic model of the response of the crossbridges and titin to active stretch is combined with a phenomenological implementation of force-length and force-velocity relationships. This combination of approaches may be useful in improving the accuracy of predictions of muscle models and whole-body simulations, which is certainly a worthy goal. However, it also may limit the insight that can be gained. For example, it does not seem that this model could reflect any effect of active titin properties on muscle shortening. In addition, it is not clear to me, either physiologically or in the model, what drives the shift from the high stiffness in short-range perturbations to the somewhat lower stiffness in mid-range perturbations.

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  2. Wellcome Trust
  3. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
  4. Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation