Study discovered by Shadow -
wildfact.com/forum/attachment.php?aid=1618 Muscular force analysis of youngaged brown bears
A comprehensive laboratory study conducted by Vladimir PrevikniKoussoufsev
Date Conducted:13 June 2003
1
EXPERIMENT
In this analysis, two lone, male Ussuri brown bears of ages 3 and 5 were gathered and used within
the study for 5 consecutive days, with weights of 83.7kilograms and 113.4kilograms, respectively. The
bears were given triplelined sedatives as requested by the administrators of this project, and a sufficient
amount of rest (> 6 hours) per day was provided for the bears, as well as food and other facilitative
measures for the highest amount of fitness preconcluding this experiment.
Upon awakening, the bears’ respective muscle masses were measured using BMI and body fat
estimates, organ opacity estimates, bone density/size measurements, and muscle fiber graphs. For the
younger of the two, the muscle mass approximated to 54.37% of his total body weight, or approximately
45.51kilograms. The older of the two approximated at 52.80% muscle mass, or approximately
59.88kilograms of muscle mass. Using muscle fiber graphology, the younger bear’s muscle fiber ratios
equated to 41.2% typeIIx fibres and 58.8% typeIa/Ib fibres. Those of the older bear equated to 46.9%
typeIIx fibres and 53.1% typeIa/Ib fibres; nearprime and prime bears tend to possess more fasttwitch
fibre type than the younger bears, mostly due to physical maturity and highintensity movements as a
result of greater testosterone.
2
1 Note: This study was published and translated into English on 08 Aug 2006.
2 Muscle mass and muscular force analysis in brown bears of varying ages Document II
Other determinants of muscle force include: capillary action, crosssectional shape of muscle,
muscle density, neuron density per length unit of muscle, and many other factors. Few animal clades and
groupings have these advantages over bears, thus effectively ruling a bear’s ability to gradually, or even
instantly, achieve and maintain maximum muscle force as the greatest.
3
For the majority of the experiment, a moveable wall consisted of microcarbon material and
carbon handles was implemented according to the directions of the administrators. The wall used a
computerized weightpressurizing system which supported both horizontal pulling and pushing directions.
The administrators, over a period of two hours, taught the bears to clasp both handles with their paws.
Respectively, the administrators of the experiment issued the following weights in order: a 250kilogram
pull, a 500kilogram push, a 1000kilogram push, and a 1720kilogram pull. Over a period of five days,
the bears were ensured sufficient and frequent food for their experimental efforts, and a subsequent phase
of cardiovascular activity was implemented upon the bears to increase maximum experimental
production; all together with a sleeping schedule typical of a foraging bear.
For the first two consecutive days, the 250kilogram pull and the 500kilogram push were both
implemented upon the bears. The bears moved both weights, over a distance of 10 meters, as directed,
with extreme ease. The administrators then directed the scientists to record their findings as a graphical
representation. On day three, the bears woke up with a 1hour cardiovascular training program which
consisted of a 40minute “lightinterval” run among the various park fields around the administrators’
facilities, a 15minute “highinterval” run in the Predaznyoski Trainway, an abandoned railroad since
1976, and a 5minute pulling exercise which required a tetherball and a chain connected into a stationary
wall opposite that of the moveable wall.
3 Muscle analysis of various animal clades and species within clades (Adams et al., 2001)
Within the fourth day, the 1000kilogram push was initiated upon both bears, and the results
conclusively pointed to a higher exertion of maximal strength as the bears pushed the weight. The
weighted wall was moved with relative ease, with the younger bear exerting more of his maximal force
than the older bear. Both were directed to push the wall 5 meters, as directed by the administrators. The
younger bear took 2.91 seconds to push the wall 5 meters, while that of the older bear elapsed to 2.34
seconds. Five hours later, a cardiovascular workout consisting of a 50minute “lightinterval” run was
implemented and the rest of the day was sectioned into the prescribed feeding and rest schedule.
The fifth and final day arrived, and the bears were given a generous supply of food, most notably
wild moose rump meat and lingonberries. The wall, weighted up to 1720kilograms, was to be pulled a
distance of 3 meters. At the conclusion of this experiment, the scientists results’ proved the younger bear
to exert maximal force, whilst the older bear exerted nearmaximum force, as proven by its pulling past
the 3meter mark. The younger bear pulled the wall at the given distance in 3.97 seconds, whilst the older
bear pulled the object in 3.66 seconds. After the tests, one scientist recommended testing the vertical
pulling force of the younger bear, in which the rest of the group agreed upon.
A barbell, weighted at 35kilograms, with specificallydesigned “claw handles” was created using
a heavyset barbell from a local gym, and carbonfiber material for the handles. The bear was to be in an
upright position with both paws grasping the claw handles as tightly as possible. The administrators then
supplied 16 additional 22kg barbell plates to the barbell, which totaled the load weight of the barbell to
387kilograms. To quantify the experiment as a successful one, the bear needed to bend down and lift the
weight, in any way, to hiplevel.
The results proved incredibly fascinating to the scientists; the bear easily pulled the barbell at a
20degree tilt; however, the lower part rested at kneelevel and the higher part rested at the waist. The
bear then released the weight and fell upon his side as a result of his unpredictable bipedal stance.
Approximately 0.83 seconds elapsed from the time the bear forcefully lifted the barbell to the barbell’s
release. The scientists graphed a linear representation of the bear’s force/time ratio. It should be known
that the bear lifted this weight with impressive ease; the younger bear’s maximal vertical pulling force is
still unknown, and might even be twice or thrice the weight given in this experiment.
CONCLUSION
Bears are noted to be extremely strong by both literature and firsthand accounts, and this
approach is also true for very young bears. The ratio of the vertical pulling weight to the young bear’s
weight approximated at 4.624x, and the ratio of the horizontal pulling weight to the young bear’s weight
approximated at 20.550x, slightly more than 20 times his own body weight. Powerlifters and other
humans, who lift according to their body’s maximum loads, will usually verticallypull 2.5 to 3.5 times
their body weight. The power of the young bear in this experiment was astonishing, and this finding could
provide more light into the muscle function of not only brown bears, but all bear species in general.
CREDITS
Vladimir PrevikniKoussoufsev (M.S, 1985Far Eastern Federal University in Vladivostok,
Russia)
Administrators Sergey Leochanin, Sergei Chomnuvo, and Alduvei Vladimirov
Scientists Dr. Genik, Dr. Nedevski, Dr.Chevernik, Dr. Stodorov, Dr. LeninKrovik, and Dr. Kalin
Previously discovered by Polar.