Skip to content
naulon

No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 29, 2026.

Bones' adaptive response to mechanical loading is essentially linear between the low strains associated with disuse and the high strains associated with the lamellar/woven bone transition

Toshihiro Sugiyama, Lee B Meakin, William J Browne and 3 more

Journal of Bone and Mineral Research · 2012

doi:10.1002/jbmr.1599

Abstract

There is a widely held view that the relationship between mechanical loading history and adult bone mass/strength includes an adapted state or “lazy zone” where the bone mass/strength remains constant over a wide range of strain magnitudes. Evidence to support this theory is circumstantial. We investigated the possibility that the “lazy zone” is an artifact and that, across the range of normal strain experience, features of bone architecture associated with strength are linearly related in size to their strain experience. Skeletally mature female C57BL/6 mice were right sciatic neurectomized to minimize natural loading in their right tibiae. From the fifth day, these tibiae were subjected to a single period of external axial loading (40, 10-second rest interrupted cycles) on alternate days for 2 weeks, with a peak dynamic load magnitude ranging from 0 to 14 N (peak strain magnitude: 0–5000 µε) and a constant loading rate of 500 N/s (maximum strain rate: 75,000 µε/s). The left tibiae were used as internal controls. Multilevel regression analyses suggest no evidence of any discontinuity in the progression of the relationships between peak dynamic load and three-dimensional measures of bone mass/strength in both cortical and cancellous regions. These are essentially linear between the low-peak locomotor strains associated with disuse (∼300 µε) and the high-peak strains derived from artificial loading and associated with the lamellar/woven bone transition (∼5000 µε). The strain:response relationship and minimum effective strain are site-specific, probably related to differences in the mismatch in strain distribution between normal and artificial loading at the locations investigated. © 2012 American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Shown for reading. Its publisher allows quoting it, not republishing it.

References 35

  1. 1.

    Lanyon LE. Using functional loading to influence bone mass and architecture: objectives, mechanisms, and relationship with estrogen of the mechanically adaptive process in bone. Bone. 1996;18:37S-43S.

    Not in our library10.1016/8756-3282(95)00378-9

  2. 2.

    Ehrlich PJ, Lanyon LE. Mechanical strain and bone cell function: a review. Osteoporos Int. 2002;13:688-700.

    Not in our library10.1007/s001980200095

  3. 3.

    Frost HM. Bone “mass” and the “mechanostat”: a proposal. Anat Rec. 1987;219:1-9.

    Not in our library10.1002/ar.1092190104

  4. 4.

    Frost HM. Bone's mechanostat: a 2003 update. Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol. 2003;275:1081-101.

    Not in our library10.1002/ar.a.10119

  5. 5.

    Lanyon LE. Functional strain in bone tissue as an objective, and controlling stimulus for adaptive bone remodelling. J Biomech. 1987;20:1083-93.

    Not in our library10.1016/0021-9290(87)90026-1

  6. 6.

    Rubin CT, Lanyon LE. Regulation of bone mass by mechanical strain magnitude. Calcif Tissue Int. 1985;37:411-7.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02553711

  7. 7.

    O'Connor JA, Lanyon LE, MacFie H. The influence of strain rate on adaptive bone remodelling. J Biomech. 1982;15:767-81.

    Not in our library10.1016/0021-9290(82)90092-6

  8. 8.

    Rubin CT, Lanyon LE. Regulation of bone formation by applied dynamic loads. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66:397-402.

    Not in our library

  9. 9.

    Carter DR. Mechanical loading histories and cortical bone remodeling. Calcif Tissue Int. 1984;36(Suppl 1):S19-24.

    Not in our library10.1007/bf02406129

  10. 10.

    Turner CH, Forwood MR, Rho JY, Yoshikawa T. Mechanical loading thresholds for lamellar and woven bone formation. J Bone Miner Res. 1994;9:87-97.

    Not in our library10.1002/jbmr.5650090113

  11. 11.

    Nikander R, Kannus P, Dastidar P, Hannula M, Harrison L, Cervinka T, Narra NG, Aktour R, Arola T, Eskola H, Soimakallio S, Heinonen A, Hyttinen J, Sievanen H. Targeted exercises against hip fragility. Osteoporos Int. 2009;20:1321-8.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00198-008-0785-x

  12. 12.

    Beaupre GS, Orr TE, Carter DR. An approach for time-dependent bone modeling and remodeling-application: a preliminary remodeling simulation. J Orthop Res. 1990;8:662-70.

    Not in our library10.1002/jor.1100080507

  13. 13.

    Lee K, Jessop H, Suswillo R, Zaman G, Lanyon L. Endocrinology: bone adaptation requires oestrogen receptor-alpha. Nature. 2003;424:389.

    Not in our library10.1038/424389a

  14. 14.

    Hert J, Sklenska A, Liskova M. Reaction of bone to mechanical stimuli. 5. Effect of intermittent stress on the rabbit tibia after resection of the peripheral nerves. Folia Morphol (Praha). 1971;19:378-87.

    Not in our library

  15. 15.

    de Souza RL, Pitsillides AA, Lanyon LE, Skerry TM, Chenu C. Sympathetic nervous system does not mediate the load-induced cortical new bone formation. J Bone Miner Res. 2005;20:2159-68.

    Not in our library10.1359/jbmr.050812

  16. 16.
  17. 17.

    McKenzie JA, Silva MJ. Comparing histological, vascular and molecular responses associated with woven and lamellar bone formation induced by mechanical loading in the rat ulna. Bone. 2011;48:250-8.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bone.2010.09.005

  18. 18.

    De Souza RL, Matsuura M, Eckstein F, Rawlinson SC, Lanyon LE, Pitsillides AA. Non-invasive axial loading of mouse tibiae increases cortical bone formation and modifies trabecular organization: a new model to study cortical and cancellous compartments in a single loaded element. Bone. 2005;37:810-8.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bone.2005.07.022

  19. 19.

    Sugiyama T, Galea GL, Lanyon LE, Price JS. Mechanical loading-related bone gain is enhanced by tamoxifen but unaffected by fulvestrant in female mice. Endocrinology. 2010;151:5582-90.

    Not in our library10.1210/en.2010-0645

  20. 20.

    Sugiyama T, Meakin LB, Galea GL, Jackson BF, Lanyon LE, Ebetino FH, Russell RG, Price JS. Risedronate does not reduce mechanical loading-related increases in cortical and trabecular bone mass in mice. Bone. 2011;49:133-9.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bone.2011.03.775

  21. 21.

    Moustafa A, Sugiyama T, Prasad J, Zaman G, Gross TS, Lanyon LE, Price JS. Mechanical loading-related changes in osteocyte sclerostin expression in mice are more closely associated with the subsequent osteogenic response than the peak strains engendered. Osteoporos Int. 2012;23:1225-34.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00198-011-1656-4

  22. 22.

    Robling AG, Burr DB, Turner CH. Recovery periods restore mechanosensitivity to dynamically loaded bone. J Exp Biol. 2001;204:3389-99.

    Not in our library10.1242/jeb.204.19.3389

  23. 23.

    Srinivasan S, Weimer DA, Agans SC, Bain SD, Gross TS. Low-magnitude mechanical loading becomes osteogenic when rest is inserted between each load cycle. J Bone Miner Res. 2002;17:1613-20.

    Not in our library10.1359/jbmr.2002.17.9.1613

  24. 24.

    Fritton SP, Rubin CT, Cowin SC. In vivo measurement of bone deformations using strain gauges. Bone mechanics handbook. 2001.

    Not in our library

  25. 25.

    Sugiyama T, Saxon LK, Zaman G, Moustafa A, Sunters A, Price JS, Lanyon LE. Mechanical loading enhances the anabolic effects of intermittent parathyroid hormone (1-34) on trabecular and cortical bone in mice. Bone. 2008;43:238-48.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bone.2008.04.012

  26. 26.

    Bouxsein ML, Boyd SK, Christiansen BA, Guldberg RE, Jepsen KJ, Muller R. Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res. 2010;25:1468-86.

    Not in our library10.1002/jbmr.141

  27. 27.

    Rasbash J, Charlton C, Browne WJ, Healy M, Cameron B. MLwiN. Version 2. 1. Bristol. 2009.

    Not in our library

  28. 28.

    Ozcivici E, Luu YK, Adler B, Qin YX, Rubin J, Judex S, Rubin CT. Mechanical signals as anabolic agents in bone. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2010;6:50-9.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrrheum.2009.239

  29. 29.

    Rubin CT, Gross TS, McLeod KJ, Bain SD. Morphologic stages in lamellar bone formation stimulated by a potent mechanical stimulus. J Bone Miner Res. 1995;10:488-95.

    Not in our library10.1002/jbmr.5650100321

  30. 30.

    Currey JD. The many adaptations of bone. J Biomech. 2003;36:1487-95.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0021-9290(03)00124-6

  31. 31.

    Sawakami K, Robling AG, Ai M, Pitner ND, Liu D, Warden SJ, Li J, Maye P, Rowe DW, Duncan RL, Warman ML, Turner CH. The Wnt co-receptor LRP5 is essential for skeletal mechanotransduction but not for the anabolic bone response to parathyroid hormone treatment. J Biol Chem. 2006;281:23698-711.

    Not in our library10.1074/jbc.m601000200

  32. 32.

    Gross TS, Edwards JL, McLeod KJ, Rubin CT. Strain gradients correlate with sites of periosteal bone formation. J Bone Miner Res. 1997;12:982-8.

    Not in our library10.1359/jbmr.1997.12.6.982

  33. 33.

    Mosley JR, March BM, Lynch J, Lanyon LE. Strain magnitude related changes in whole bone architecture in growing rats. Bone. 1997;20:191-8.

    Not in our library10.1016/s8756-3282(96)00385-7

  34. 34.

    Saxon LK, Jackson BF, Sugiyama T, Lanyon LE, Price JS. Analysis of multiple bone responses to graded strains above functional levels, and to disuse, in mice in vivo show that the human Lrp5 G171V High Bone Mass mutation increases the osteogenic response to loading but that lack of Lrp5 activity reduces it. Bone. 2011;49:184-93.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.bone.2011.03.683

  35. 35.

    Chow JW, Fox S, Jagger CJ, Chambers TJ. Role for parathyroid hormone in mechanical responsiveness of rat bone. Am J Physiol. 1998;274:E146-54.

    Not in our library10.1152/ajpendo.1998.274.1.e146

Cited by papers we hold 4

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.