Terminology for contractions of muscles during shortening, while isometric, and during lengthening

Abstract

Communication among scientists must be clear and concise to avoid ambiguity and misinterpretations. The selection of words must be based on accepted definitions. The fields of biomechanics, muscle physiology, and exercise science have had a particularly difficult time with terminology, arising from the complexity of muscle contractions and by the use of inappropriate terminology by scientists. The dictionary definition of the verb “contract,” specifically for the case of muscle, is “to undergo an increase in tension, or force, and become shorter.” Under all circumstances, an activated muscle generates force, but an activated muscle generating force does not invariably shorten! During the 1920s and 1930s, investigators recognized that the interaction between the force generated by the muscle and the load on the muscle results in either shortening, no length change (isometric), or lengthening of the muscle. The recognition that muscles perform three different types of “contractions” required that contraction be redefined as “to undergo activation and generate force.” Modifiers of contraction are then needed to clarify the lack of movement or the directionality of movement. Despite the contradiction, for 75 years the lack of movement has been termed an “isometric contraction.” The directionality of the movement is then best described by the adjectives “shortening” and “lengthening.” The definitions of “concentric” as “having the same center” and of “eccentric” as “not having the same center” are consistent with hypertrophy, or remodeling of the heart muscle, but are inappropriate to describe the contractions of skeletal muscles.