Electromyographyc evaluation of movements of lower limb in

double pulley system equipment: comparison between

gastrocnemius (caput laterale) and gluteus maximus

N. Tassi 1 and V. Engrácia Valenti 2

Abstract
It was evaluated movements of lower limb in the double pulley system equipment on ten male volunteers dur-
ing contraction of gastrocnemius (caput laterale) and gluteus maximus muscles in the following movements: 1)
hip extension with extended knee and erect trunk, 2) hip extension with flexed knee and erect trunk, 3) hip
extension with flexed knee and erect trunk, 3) hip extension with extended knee and inclined trunk, 5) hip abduc-
tion along the midline, 7) hip abduction with extension beyond the midline, 8) adduction with hip flexion beyond
the midline, 8) adduction with hip flexion beyond the midline, and 9) adduction with hip extension beyond the
midline. Myoelectric signals were taken up by Lec Tec surface electrodes connected to a 6-channel Lynx elec-
tromyographic signal amplifier coupled with a computer equipped with a model CAD 10/26 analogue digital con-
version board and with a specific software for signal recording and analysis. We observed weak gastrocnemius mus-
cle activity for all movements studied. In the case of gluteus maximus, the most important potentials were observed
for movement 2, while for the remaining movements the actions were of reasonable intensity. Compared to glu-
teus, gastrocnemius was less required for all movements.

Key-words: Double pulley – Electromyography – Gastrocnemius – Gluteus Maximus.

Introduction human movements.5,20 Gardner et al.,3 reported that

The use of weights for muscle recovery and devel-
opment today is a consolidated reality in Physio-
therapy and Physical Education. The double pulley
is useful for the control of movement reaction22 and
it is reliable to rehabilitation.6
Using electromyography, many investigators have
focused their research on the evaluation of muscle
contraction during movements performed on equip-
ment for muscle training and development. Gas-
trocnemius and gluteus maximus are essential groups
of muscle related to gait, posture and great part of
1 Ph.D.
Speech Pathology and Audiology Department, Faculty of Philos-
ophy and Sciences, Paulista State University (UNESP), Marília, SP,
Brazil
2 Physical Therapist. Special Education Department, Faculty of Philos-
ophy and Sciences, Paulista State University (UNESP), Marília, SP,
Brazil
gastrocnemius does not flex the knee if the foot is in
complete plantar flexion. Conversely, when the knee
is completely extended, the extended gastrocnemius
tends to push the foot for plantar flexion due to lig-
ament action. If the foot is in complete dorsal flex-
ion, the extended gastrocnemius tends to push knee
for flexion. Williams et al.,24 stated that, in addition
to contributing to knee flexion, gastrocnemius acts
as a primary motor of plantar flexion. Gluteus max-
imus participates in powerful movements such as
standing up and during jumping. Studies related to
gluteus maximus suggest that it is the main extensor
of the hip and its weakness is compensated by the
potential of the hamstrings. Besides, gluteus max-
imus acts in powerful movements such as standing
up and during jumping.9 Therefore, the knowledge
of their kinesiologic and biomechanic role is very
important to understand the human movement

Electromyogr. clin. Neurophysiol., 2004, 44, 000-000. 1

science. However, it was not found any study related
to evaluation of movements of gastrocnemius and
gluteus maximus in the double pulley equipment.
In view of the above considerations, the objec-
tive of the present study was to compare movements
of lower limb between gastrocnemius (caput laterale)
and gluteus maximus during hip extension, hip
abduction and hip adduction with trunk and knee in
different positions.
Material and methods
Study population
The study was conducted on 10 right-handed
male volunteers aged 18 to 25∞∞years old who prac-
ticed muscle building, with similar anthropometric
characteristics. The study was approved by the
Ethics Committee of Paulita State University –
Marília, SP, Brazil, and was fully explained before
written informed consent was obtained from all
participants.
Electromyographyc mensuration
The muscle potentials were recorded using Lec
Tec surface electrodes connected to a 6-channel Lynx
electromyographic signal amplifier, calibrated at
500 µv, coupled to a computer equipped with an
analogue digital converter, A/D (CAD 10/26) and
with specific software for the recording and analy-
sis of electromyographic signals. The electrodes were
positioned as indicated by Delagi et al.:2
- Gastrocnemius (caput laterale): 8∞∞cm below the
facies poplitea femoris;
- Gluteus maximus: at the middle point between
the linea glutea posterior os ilium and the tubero-
sitas glutea.
We evaluated movements of gastrocnemius and
gluteus maximus in the Double Pulley system equip-
ment with trunk and hip in different positions:
1: hip extension with extended knee and erect trunk;
2: hip extension with flexed knee and erect trunk;
3: hip extension with extended knee and inclined
trunk;
4: hip extension with flexed knee and inclined trunk;
5: hip abduction along the midline;
2
6: hip abduction with hip flexion beyond the mid-
line;
7: hip abduction with hip extension beyond the mid-
line;
8: hip adduction with hip flexion beyond the mid-
line, and
9: hip adduction with hip extension beyond the mid-
line.
Numerical analysis was performed by signal inte-
gration (amplitude and frequency, at beginning and
end of data collection) and the effective value (µ) was
obtained, which permitted graphic and statistical
analysis of the results. To synchronize the acquisition
of the electromyographic data and the corresponding
posture during the movement, a photoelectronic sys-
tem was used to activate an incandescent bulb, which
emitted a common signal to the EMG apparatus
(Lynx - Tecnologia Eletrônica Ltda.).
Statistical analysis
We used double factor ANOVA without replica-
tion, available in Microsoft Excel (version/1997). We
first identified the occurrence of significant differ-
ences in muscle actions among the nine movements.
To identify the site where these differences occurred,
we paired the movements for analysis in the follow-
ing order:
- movements: 1 vs. 2; 1 vs. 3; 1 vs. 4; 1 vs. 5; 1 vs.
6; 1 vs. 7; 1 vs. 8; 1 vs. 9;
- movements: 2 vs. 3; 2 vs. 4; 2 vs. 5; 2 vs. 6; 2 vs.
7; 2 vs. 8; 2 vs. 9;
- movements: 3 vs. 4; 3 vs. 5; 3 vs. 6; 3 vs. 7; 3 vs.
8; 3 vs. 9;
- movements: 4 vs. 5; 4 vs. 6; 4 vs. 7; 4 vs. 8; 4 vs. 9;
- movements: 5 vs. 6; 5 vs. 7; 5 vs. 8; 5 vs. 9;
- movements: 6 vs. 7; 6 vs. 8; 6 vs. 9;
- movements: 7 vs. 8; 7 vs. 9;
- movements: 8 vs. 9.
Significant differences in potentials were observed
between gastrocnemius (caput laterale) and gluteus
maximus muscles during nine movements. The mus-
cles were again analyzed separately for each move-
ment to identify the occurrence of the significant
differences, as follows:
- movement 1; - gastrocnemius∞∞≈∞ gluteus maximus;
- movement 2: - gastrocnemius∞∞≈∞ gluteus maximus;
and so on until movement 9.
 Table 1. – Statistical analysis of the mean effective values of the gastrocnemius (caput laterale) muscle,
obtained during the movements performed
ANOVA

Source of variation SS Df MS F P Value Critical F

Volunteers 9384,554 9 1042,728 37,84423 7,86E-24 2,012705

Movements 571,2989 8 71,41237 2,591803* 0,015096 2,069832
Error 1983,828 72 27,55317
Total 11939,68 89

Table 2. – Statistical analysis of the mean effective values of the gluteus maximus muscle, obtained during the movements performed

ANOVA

Source of variation SS Df MS F P Value Critical F

Volunteers 23202,14 9 2578,016 11,18313 1,02E-10 2,012705

Movements 18581,82 8 2322,728 10,07572 2,61E-09 2,069832
Error 16597,96 72 230,5272
Total 58381,92 89

Results
Considering the results of ANOVA, the weak
activity pattern of the gastrocnemius was similar for
all movements (Figure 1). Statistically significant dif-
ferences were detected (Table∞∞1), specially, between
movements 2x3, 2x6, and 4x6 (Table∞∞2).
The most important activity of the gluteus max-
imus was observed for movement 2, although activ-
ity levels of reasonable intensity were also recorded
for the other movements (Figure 2).
Statistical analysis of the effective values revealed
significant differences in the muscle potentials of the
gluteus maximus during the nine movements, as
shown in Table∞∞3.
Pairwise comparison of the movements showed
significant differences in the gluteus maximus poten-
tials for the following movements: 1x4, 1x6, 1x7, 2x3,
2x4, 2x6, 3x4, 3x5, 3x6, 3x8, 3x9, 4x5, 4x8, 4x9, 5x6,
5x7, 6x8, 6x9, 7x8, and 7x9 (Table∞∞4).
The gastrocnemius muscle (caput laterale) showed
weaker potentials than the gluteus maximus for all
movements studied (Figure 3), with the differences being
significant for movements 1, 2, 3, 5, and 8 (Table∞∞4).
Discussion
Based on the results of the present study, gas-
trocnemius was less required than gluteus maximus
during all movements in the double pulley. We
believe that the potentials values shown by gluteus
maximus during all movements are due to its action
on the hip, thigh and trunk.

3

There are studies that support our data, which
suggested the weak activity of gastrocnemius dur-
ing movements of hip extension in different pos-
tures10,14 and studies of Houck,8 Hollinshead,7 and
Jonkers et al.,9 which reported that gluteus maximus
exerts powerful actions in these regions, especially
during hip extension with flexed knee and erect
trunk and that its weakness is compensated by the
potential of the hamstrings.
During movement 1∞∞gluteus maximus presented
greater mean values than gastrocnemius. Recent
studies11,13 support our data, it was concluded that
muscle position relative to surrounding tissues and
muscle length co-determines muscle force, but it was
not possible to determine whether this also occurs in
triceps surae.
We believe that during hip extension with flexed
knee and erect trunk (movement 2), gastrocemius
showed expressive values because knee was flexed.
According to Tassi et al.21 gastrocnemius presents
its greatest action potential at the beginning of knee
flexion with the feet in plantar flexion in the Leg
Press. The strong potentials observed in gluteus max-
imus for movement 2 differed from the muscle action
obtained for exercises 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 (mod-
erate potentials), since they were related to simulta-
neous extension movements of the trunk, hip and
flexed knee, in contrast to the low intensity poten-
tials.
Gastrocnemius showed its greatest value during
hip extension with extended knee and inclined trunk
(movement 3), whereas this movement was one of
the weakest performance for gluteus maximus.
Recent studies suggest that lateral and medial gas-
trocnemius play an important role in transverse and
frontal plane movements during cut tasks.8 Gluteus

Table 3. – Statistical analysis of the mean effective values of the gluteus maximus muscle,
obtained during the movements in which were detected significant differences.
ANOVA

Source of variation SS Df MS F P Value Critical F

Movement 1∞∞≈∞ 4 1782,65 1 1782,65 18,90859 0,001855 5,117357

Movement 1∞∞≈∞ 6 1528,976 1 1528,976 14,89458 0,003851 5,117357
Movement 1∞∞≈∞ 7 1020,02 1 1020,02 19,09542 0,001798 5,117357
Movement 2∞∞≈∞ 3 5306,63 1 5306,63 9,2942 0,013823 5,117357
Movement 2∞∞≈∞ 6 7859,027 1 7859,027 15,69045 0,003299 5,117357
Movement 3∞∞≈∞ 4 249,7831 1 249,7831 8,395533 0,017667 5,117357
Movement 3∞∞≈∞ 5 1074,431 1 1074,431 10,90001 0,009208 5,117357
Movement 3∞∞≈∞ 6 160,9146 1 160,9146 12,7823 0,005975 5,117357
Movement 3∞∞≈∞ 8 2966,804 1 2966,804 14,87129 0,003869 5,117357
Movement 3∞∞≈∞ 9 3960,987 1 3960,987 12,70442 0,006078 5,117357
Movement 4∞∞≈∞ 5 2360,313 1 2360,313 29,28892 0,000426 5,117357
Movement 4∞∞≈∞ 8 4938,282 1 4938,282 28,98679 0,000442 5,117357
Movement 4∞∞≈∞ 9 6200,129 1 6200,129 23,44034 0,000919 5,117357
Movement 5∞∞≈∞ 6 2066,951 1 2066,951 25,39755 0,0007 5,117357
Movement 5∞∞≈∞ 7 1466,842 1 1466,842 13,4256 0,005202 5,117357
Movement 6∞∞≈∞ 8 4509,605 1 4509,605 29,87722 0,000397 5,117357
Movement 6∞∞≈∞ 9 5718,624 1 5718,624 21,74533 0,00118 5,117357
Movement 7∞∞≈∞ 8 3598,708 1 3598,708 19,07007 0,001805 5,117357
Movement 7∞∞≈∞ 9 4686,391 1 4686,391 14,69788 0,004004 5,117357

4
 Table 4. – Statistical analysis of the mean effective values of gastrocnemius and
gluteus maximus muscles during movements 1; 2; 3; 5; 8 e 9
ANOVA
Source of variation SS Df MS
Movement 1 3575,673 1 3575,673
Movement 2 10734,2 1 10734,2
Movement 3 1370,506 1 1370,506
Movement 5 4391,462 1 4391,462
Movement 8 7154,788 1 7154,788
maximus is evidenced as a synergist muscle during
movements of hip extension in orthostatic position,
it is not the main muscle during this movement.24
Its superior fibers are involved in powerful abduc-
tion, it induces tension of the fasciae latae and it
stabilizes the femur above the tibia when the femoral
extensors are relaxed.24
With respect to movements 2 and 4, hip extension
with the knee flexed and an erect and inclined trunk,
respectively, we believe that the potential actions
recorded for gastrocnemius were only due to the
action of this muscle on knee flexion. This assump-
tion is supported by studies of Laplaud et al.10 and
Tscharner et al.23 Furthermore, the weak activity of
this muscle during movements 2 and 4∞∞may be
explained by the fact that gastrocnemius is unable to
exert maximum potential on ankle and knee at the
same time during movement in the Leg Press21 and
that it was noted that gastrocnemius fibers are very
short during knee flexion, which impairs the simul-
taneous execution of these actions.10,19
We believe that our results related to gluteus max-
imus at the movement 4∞∞may be explained by stud-
ies of Neptune et al.16 They suggested that the con-
centric contraction of gluteus maximus is expected
to control hip flexion or stabilize pelvis and prevent
stance leg collapse by acting to extend the hip. On
the other hand, no important participation of gas-
trocnemius muscle was observed during movements
5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 whether compared to gluteus max-
imus, we suggest that this fact could be explained by
its insertion. Our data coincide with studies of
Goodwin,4 which concluded that gastrocnemius was
unreliable while vastus medialis was reliable in ortho-
static position.
We evidenced greater potential of gluteus max-
imus than gastrocnemius (caput laterale) contrac-
F P Value Critical
9,35047 0,013619 5,117357
10,56093 0,010001 5,117357
10,62439 0,009846 5,117357
22,92739 0,00099 5,117357
24,60354 0,00078 5,117357
tion during hip abduction with hip extended. It may
be suggested that the rigid supporting system of the
pelvic deltoid help gluteus maximus to effectuate its
greater potential at those movements. Our results
are supported by data of Nyland et al.,17 which indi-
cated that the pelvic deltoid attaches indirectly to
femur through the intermuscle thigh septa, the ili-
otibial tract and the tendinous insertion of the cau-
dal gluteus maximus to the gluteal tuberosity.
At movement 6 and 7 it was not seen an impor-
tant participation of gluteus maximus. It is sup-
ported by studies of Sadegui et al.,18 which indicated
that gluteus maximus is not important during hip
extension and hip flexion with hip abduction. Dur-
ing hip adduction with hip flexion beyond the mid-
line (movements 8) gluteus maximus exhibited
important values. Furthermore, gluteus maximus
presented greater potential values during hip adduc-
tion with hip extension beyond the midline (move-
ments 9). It supports studies of Birnbaum et al.,1
which evidenced that gluteus maximus is important
to hold femoral head in orthostatic position.
Concluding remarks
In conclusion, it was observed weak but homo-
geneous gastrocnemius muscle activity during all
movements in this study and mean values related to
gluteus maximus demonstrated that it was required
during all movements. The new findings of the cur-
rent study suggest that gastrocnemius is less required
than gluteus maximus for all movements evaluated
in the double pulley. Future studies may also con-
sider the effect of gender and age and influence of
other muscles that act in those movements in dou-
ble pulley.
5
References
1. HOLLINSHEAD, W. H. and ROSSE, C.: ANATOMIA. 4ed. Rio de
Janeiro. Intelivros. 1991.
2. HOUCK, J.: Muscle activation patterns of selected lower
extremity muscles during stepping and cutting tasks. J Elec-
tromyogr Kinesiol. 2003;13(6):545-54.
3. JONKERS, I., STEWART, C. and SPAEPEN, A.: The comple-
mentary role of the plantarflexors, hamstrings and gluteus
maximus in the control of stance limb stability during gait.
Gait and Posture, 2003; 17: 264- 272.
4. LAPLAUD, D., HUG, F. and GRÉLOT, L.: Reproducibility of
eight lower limb muscles activity level in the course of an
incremental pedaling exercise. Journal of Electromyography
and Kinesiology, 2006; 16: 158–166.
5. LARSSON, B., KADI, F., LINDVALL, B. and GERDLE, B.: Sur-
face electromyography and peak torque of repetitive maxi-
mum isokinetic plantar flexions in relation to aspects of mus-
cle morphology. Jour Elect Kines, 2006; 16: 281–290.
6. LI, L., Landin, D., GRODESKY, J. and MYERS, J.: The func-
tion of gastrocnemius as a knee flexor at selected knee and
ankle angles. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2002; 12:385–90.
7. MAAS, H., BAAN, G.C. and HUIJING, P.A.: Muscle force is
determined also by muscle relative position: isolated effects.
J Biomech. 2004; 1:99–110.
8. MOHR, K. J. et al.: Electromyographic of stretching: the effect
of warm-up. Clin J Sport Med, 1998; 8, 215 – 220.
9. MONTE, G.D., ARAMPATZIS, A., STOGIANNARI, C. and KARA-
MANIDIS, K.: In vivo motion transmission in the inactive gas-
trocnemius medialis muscle–tendon unit during ankle and knee
joint rotation. J Electromyogr Kinesiol, 2005; xxx: xxx–xxx.
10. NEPTUNE, R.R., ZAJAC, F.E., and KAUTZ, S.A.: Muscle force
redistributes segmental power for body progression during
walking. Gait and Posture, 2004; 19: 194–205.
11. NYLAND, J., KUZEMCHEK, S., PARKS, M., CABORN, D.N.M.:
Femoral anteversion influences vastus medialis and gluteus
medius EMG amplitude: composite hip abductor EMG
amplitude ratios during isometric combined hip abduction-
external rotation. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2004; 14: 255–261.
12. SADEGHI, H., SADEGHI, S., PRINCE, ALLARD, P., LABELLE,
H. and VAUGHAN, C.L.: Functional roles of ankle and hip
sagittal muscle moments in able-bodied gait. Clin Biomech,
2001; 16:688–95.
13. SANDERSON, D., MARTIN, P.E., HONEYMAN, G. and KEEFER,
J.: Gastrocnemius and soleus muscle length, velocity, and
EMG responses to changes in pedalling cadence. Journal of
Electromyography and Kinesiology, 2006 (in preparation).
14. STEWART, C., POSTANS, N., SCHWARTZ, MH., ROZUMALSKI,
A. and ROBERTS, A.: An exploration of the function of the
triceps surae during normal gait using functional electrical
stimulation. Gait Posture. 2007 Jan 12; [Epub ahead of print]
15. Tassi N et al. Electromyographic behaviour of the gastroc-
nemius muscle during knee extension and flexion performed
on the Leg press. Electromyography and Clinical Neurophisi-
ology, 1999; 39: 367–377.
16. TASSI, N. and GONCALVES, M.: Electromyographic valida-
tion of the double pulley equipment during movements of
the lower limbs. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol, 2002;
42(8):473-80.
6
17. TSCHARNER, V.V. and GOEPFERT, B.: Estimation of the inter-
play between groups of fast and slow muscle fibers of the tib-
ialis anterior and gastrocnemius muscle while running. Jour-
nal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 2006; 16: 188–197.
18. WILLIAMS, P. L. et al.: Gray anatomia. Rio de Janeiro. Gua-
nabara Koogan. 37ed., 597 - 603. 1995.
19. BIRNBAUM, K., SIEBERT, C.H., PANDORF, T., SCHOPPHOFF,
E., PRESCHER, A. and NIETHARD, F.U.: Anatomical and bio-
mechanical investigations of the iliotibial tract. Surg Radiol
Anat., 2004;26(6):433-46.
20. DELAGI, E.F. and PEROTTO, A.: Clinical electromyography
of the hand. Arch Phys Med Rehabil,. 1976; 57(2):66-9.
21. GARDNER, E., GRAY, D. J. and O’Rahilly, R.: Anatom ia:
estudo regional do corpo humano. Rio de Janeiro, Guan-
abara Koogan 1978.
22. GOODWIN, P.C., KOORTS, K., MACK, R., MAI. S, MORRISSEY,
M.C. and HOOPER, D.M.: Reliability of leg muscle elec-
tromyography in vertical jumping. Eur J Appl Physiol., 1999;
79:374–8.
23. HERNIGOU, P., POIGNARD, A., MATHIEU, G., COHEN, G.,
MANICOM, O., and FILIPPINI, P.: Total hip arthroplasty after
failure of per- and subtrochanteric fracture fixation in elderly
subjects. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot., 2006;
92(4):310-5.
24. HOFF, J., GRAN, A. and HELGERUD, J.: Maximal strength
training improves aerobic endurance performance. Scand J
Med Sci Sport., 2002; 12(5):288-95.
25. HOLLINSHEAD, W. H. and ROSSE, C.: Anatomia. 4ed. Rio de
Janeiro. Intelivros. 1991.
26. HOUCK, J.: Muscle activation patterns of selected lower
extremity muscles during stepping and cutting tasks. J Elec-
tromyogr Kinesiol. 2003;13(6):545-54.
27. JONKERS, I., STEWART, C. and SPAEPEN, A.: The comple-
mentary role of the plantarflexors, hamstrings and gluteus
maximus in the control of stance limb stability during gait.
Gait and Posture, 2003; 17: 264- 272.
28. LAPLAUD, D., HUG, F. and GRÉLOT, L.: Reproducibility of
eight lower limb muscles activity level in the course of an
incremental pedaling exercise. Journal of Electromyography
and Kinesiology, 2006; 16: 158–166.
29. LARSSON, B., KADI, F., LINDVALL, B. and GERDLE, B.: Sur-
face electromyography and peak torque of repetitive maxi-
mum isokinetic plantar flexions in relation to aspects of mus-
cle morphology. Jour Elect Kines, 2006; 16: 281–290.
30. LI, L., LANDIN, D., GRODESKY, J. and MYERS, J.: The func-
tion of gastrocnemius as a knee flexor at selected knee and
ankle angles. J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2002; 12:385–90.
31. MAAS, H., BAAN, G.C. and HUIJING, P.A.: Muscle force is
determined also by muscle relative position: isolated effects.
J Biomech. 2004; 1:99–110.
32. MOHR, K. J. et al.: Electromyographic of stretching: the effect
of warm-up. Clin J Sport Med, 1998; 8, 215 – 220.
33. MONTE, G.D., ARAMPATZIS, A., STOGIANNARI, C. and KARA-
MANIDIS, K.: In vivo motion transmission in the inactive gas-
trocnemius medialis muscle–tendon unit during ankle and knee
joint rotation. J Electromyogr Kinesiol, 2005; xxx: xxx–xxx.
34. NEPTUNE, R.R., ZAJAC, F.E., and KAUTZ, S.A.: Muscle force
redistributes segmental power for body progression during
walking. Gait and Posture, 2004; 19: 194–205.
35. NYLAND, J., KUZEMCHEK, S., PARKS, M., CABORN, D.N.M.:
Femoral anteversion influences vastus medialis and gluteus
medius EMG amplitude: composite hip abductor EMG
amplitude ratios during isometric combined hip abduction-
external rotation. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2004; 14: 255–261.
36. SADEGHI, H., SADEGHI, S., PRINCE., ALLARD. P., LABELLE,
H. and VAUGHAN, C.L.: Functional roles of ankle and hip
sagittal muscle moments in able-bodied gait. Clin Biomech,
2001; 16:688–95.
37. SANDERSON, D., MARTIN, P.E., HONEYMAN, G. and KEEFER,
J.: Gastrocnemius and soleus muscle length, velocity, and
EMG responses to changes in pedalling cadence. Journal of
Electromyography and Kinesiology, 2006 (in preparation).
38. STEWART, C., POSTANS, N., SCHWARTZ, MH., ROZUMALSKI,
A. and ROBERTS, A.: An exploration of the function of the
triceps surae during normal gait using functional electrical
stimulation. Gait Posture. 2007 Jan 12; [Epub ahead of print]
39. Tassi N et al. Electromyographic behaviour of the gastroc-
nemius muscle during knee extension and flexion performed
on the Leg press. Electromyography and Clinical Neurophisi-
ology, 1999; 39: 367–377.
40. TASSI, N. and GONCALVES, M.: Electromyographic valida-
tion of the double pulley equipment during movements of
the lower limbs. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol, 2002;
42(8):473-80.
41. TSCHARNER, V.V. and GOEPFERT, B.: Estimation of the inter-
play between groups of fast and slow muscle fibers of the tib-
ialis anterior and gastrocnemius muscle while running. Jour-
nal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 2006; 16: 188–197.
42. WILLIAMS, P. L. et al.: Gray anatomia. Rio de Janeiro. Gua-
nabara Koogan. 37ed., 597 - 603. 1995.
Address reprint requests to:
Dr. Nadir Tassi
Av. Hygino Muzzi Filho, 737
Campus Universitário, Marília
CEP: 17.525-900, São Paulo, Brasil.
Tel: (55) (14) 3402-1372
Fax: (55) (14) 3422-4797, E-mail: tassi@flash.tv.br