<p>Body weight (BW), soleus muscle mass, and normalized muscle mass in weight-bearing (WB), hindlimb-unloaded (HU), and electrically stimulated (HU-ES) groups. *p<0.05, significant difference compared to WB group; <sup>#</sup>p<0.05, significant difference compared to HU group. Values are means ± SEM.</p
<p>Comparison of the mean values for the four pelvic muscles volume (symptomatic v. non-symptomatic ...
<p>Data are shown as the means ± SD, n = 10.</p><p>* P <0.05</p><p>** P <0.01, significantly differe...
Percent difference in changes between groups with magnitude-based inferences when adjusted to baseli...
<p>Cross sectional area (CSA), maximal tetanic force (P<sub>o</sub>) with or without normalization t...
<p>(A) Curves showing the force-length relationship obtained for one soleus muscle. (B) Force-freque...
<p>Each bar represents the relative value of overloaded muscle vs. the contralateral control muscle,...
<p>Values are means ± SEM (n = 6, each group). *: HC (HFD control) vs. NC (normal chow control) p<0....
<p>Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 5–13 mice/group).</p><p>*p < 0.05, HFD-PBS <i>vs</i>. C.<...
<p>Values were expressed as mean ± SEM, N = 47 (n = 10, 8, 9, 10, 10, respectively).</p><p>*<i>P</i>...
<p>Data presented as mean ± SEM. <sup>a</sup> significantly different compared to control, <sup>b</s...
Purpose: Despite increasing interest in bio-impedance analysis (BIA) for estimation of segmental ske...
<p>Data are presented as means ± SEM.</p><p>Group data for body weight (gram) for the control group ...
1<p>Data are means ± SEM; values with different letters are statistically different.</p
<p>SAT: subcutaneous adipose tissue, IMAT: intermuscular adipose tissue. Ratios have been expressed ...
<p>Wet masses of the gastrocnemius (A), soleus (B), and extensor digitorum longus (C) were measured ...
<p>Comparison of the mean values for the four pelvic muscles volume (symptomatic v. non-symptomatic ...
<p>Data are shown as the means ± SD, n = 10.</p><p>* P <0.05</p><p>** P <0.01, significantly differe...
Percent difference in changes between groups with magnitude-based inferences when adjusted to baseli...
<p>Cross sectional area (CSA), maximal tetanic force (P<sub>o</sub>) with or without normalization t...
<p>(A) Curves showing the force-length relationship obtained for one soleus muscle. (B) Force-freque...
<p>Each bar represents the relative value of overloaded muscle vs. the contralateral control muscle,...
<p>Values are means ± SEM (n = 6, each group). *: HC (HFD control) vs. NC (normal chow control) p<0....
<p>Values are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 5–13 mice/group).</p><p>*p < 0.05, HFD-PBS <i>vs</i>. C.<...
<p>Values were expressed as mean ± SEM, N = 47 (n = 10, 8, 9, 10, 10, respectively).</p><p>*<i>P</i>...
<p>Data presented as mean ± SEM. <sup>a</sup> significantly different compared to control, <sup>b</s...
Purpose: Despite increasing interest in bio-impedance analysis (BIA) for estimation of segmental ske...
<p>Data are presented as means ± SEM.</p><p>Group data for body weight (gram) for the control group ...
1<p>Data are means ± SEM; values with different letters are statistically different.</p
<p>SAT: subcutaneous adipose tissue, IMAT: intermuscular adipose tissue. Ratios have been expressed ...
<p>Wet masses of the gastrocnemius (A), soleus (B), and extensor digitorum longus (C) were measured ...
<p>Comparison of the mean values for the four pelvic muscles volume (symptomatic v. non-symptomatic ...
<p>Data are shown as the means ± SD, n = 10.</p><p>* P <0.05</p><p>** P <0.01, significantly differe...
Percent difference in changes between groups with magnitude-based inferences when adjusted to baseli...
DOI
Add to ORKG