Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 24, 2026

Maximum Isometric Tetanic Force Measurement of the Tibialis Anterior Muscle in the Rat
Published on: June 26, 2021
Changes in tibialis anterior architecture affect the amplitude of surface electromyograms
Taian M Vieira1, Maria Cristina Bisi2, Rita Stagni2
1Laboratory for Engineering of the Neuromuscular System (LISiN), Department of Electronics and Telecommunication, Politecnico di Torino, Via Cavalli 22/h, 10138, Torino, Italy. taian.vieira@polito.it.
Background:
Variations in the amplitude of surface electromyograms (EMGs) are typically considered to advance inferences on the timing and degree of muscle activation in different circumstances. Surface EMGs are however affected by factors other than the muscle neural drive. In this study, we use electrical stimulation to investigate whether architectural changes in tibialis anterior (TA), a key muscle for balance and gait, affect the amplitude of surface EMGs.
Methods:
Current pulses (500 μs; 2 pps) were applied to the fibular nerve of ten participants, with the ankle at neutral, full dorsi and full plantar flexion positions. Ultrasound images were collected to quantify changes in TA architecture with changes in foot position. The peak-to-peak amplitude of differential M waves, detected with a grid of surface electrodes (16 × 4 electrodes; 10 mm inter-electrode distance), was considered to assess the effect of changes in TA architecture on the surface recordings.
Results:
On average, both TA pennation angle and width increased by respectively 7 deg. and 9 mm when the foot moved from plantar to dorsiflexion (P < 0.02). M-wave amplitudes changed significantly with ankle position. M waves elicited in dorsiflexion and neutral positions were ~25% greater than those obtained during plantar flexion, regardless of where they were detected in the grid (P < 0.001). This figure increased to ~50% when considering bipolar M waves.
Conclusions:
Findings reported here indicate the changes in EMG amplitude observed during dynamic contractions, especially when changes in TA architecture are expected (e.g., during gait), may not be exclusively conceived as variations in TA activation.

