For a terrestrial animal to move in the complex natural environment, the limb muscles must modulate force and work performance to meet changing mechanical requirements; however, it is not clear whether this is accomplished via a collective shift in function by all limb muscles, or a division of labor among limb muscles. Do muscles differ in their ability to modulate force-length contractile function to meet the mechanical demands of different locomotor tasks? We explore this question by examining the in vivo force-length performance of the guinea fowl Numida meleagris lateral gastrocnemius (LG) and digital flexor-IV (DF-IV), during level and incline locomotion. During level locomotion, the LG and DF-IV exhibit differing muscle fascicle strain patterns: the LG shortens by 10-15% while developing force, whereas the DF-IV undergoes a stretch-shorten cycle with large strain amplitudes and small net strains of 1-8%. Furthermore, the DF-IV operates at higher muscle stresses (92-130·kPa, compared to 23-39·kPa for LG) and possesses a longer tendon, which allows the DF-IV tendon to recover greater elastic energy than the LG tendon. During incline locomotion, these muscles contribute only one-third of the energy expected for their mass, with the DF-IV exhibiting high stride-to-stride variability in work output. While the stretch-shorten cycle of the DF-IV muscle may allow more economic force production, it also leads to large changes in work output with small changes in the relative timing of force and strain. Thus, while the primary determinants of LG work are net strain and mean force, the primary determinant of DF-IV work is the phase relationship between force and strain. Our results suggest that, in addition to influencing a muscle's mechanical performance during steady level locomotion, morphology also affects its capacity and mechanism for altering work output for different locomotor tasks.

Neuromechanics seeks to understand how muscles, sense organs, motor pattern generators, and brain interact to produce coordinated movement, not only in complex terrain but also when confronted with unexpected perturbations. Applications of neuromechanics include ameliorating human health problems (including prosthesis design and restoration of movement following brain or spinal cord injury), as well as the design, actuation and control of mobile robots. In animals, coordinated movement emerges from the interplay among descending output from the central nervous system, sensory input from body and environment, muscle dynamics, and the emergent dynamics of the whole animal. The inevitable coupling between neural information processing and the emergent mechanical behavior of animals is a central theme of neuromechanics. Fundamentally, motor control involves a series of transformations of information, from brain and spinal cord to muscles to body, and back to brain. The control problem revolves around the specific transfer functions that describe each transformation. The transfer functions depend on the rules of organization and operation that determine the dynamic behavior of each subsystem (i.e., central processing, force generation, emergent dynamics, and sensory processing). In this review, we (1) consider the contributions of muscles, (2) sensory processing, and (3) central networks to motor control, (4) provide examples to illustrate the interplay among brain, muscles, sense organs and the environment in the control of movement, and (5) describe advances in both robotics and neuromechanics that have emerged from application of biological principles in robotic design. Taken together, these studies demonstrate that (1) intrinsic properties of muscle contribute to dynamic stability and control of movement, particularly immediately after perturbations; (2) proprioceptive feedback reinforces these intrinsic self-stabilizing properties of muscle; (3) control systems must contend with inevitable time delays that can simplify or complicate control; and (4) like most animals under a variety of circumstances, some robots use a trial and error process to tune central feedforward control to emergent body dynamics.