Big bones mean big muscles: an MRI-based dataset of muscle-bone-body size relationships across 70 human muscles of the upper limb, trunk, and lower limb

Body sizes and shapes vary widely, even among healthy adults, resulting in diverse muscle sizes, strengths, and performance capacities. This study developed an artificially intelligent (AI) algorithm to segment individual muscles and bones from whole body MRI scans of 102 healthy adults (49 males, 53 females) aged 18-50 yr, generating three-dimensional (3-D) segmentations of 70 muscles and 13 bones spanning the upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs. We quantified muscle volume, asymmetry, and fat fraction at whole body, regional, and individual-muscle levels, and examined how these properties correlate with body size and skeletal dimensions. Fat fraction and asymmetry varied across muscles and were generally similar between sexes; however, the distribution of muscle volume across the body differed between females and males. Across all predictors tested, total bone volume showed the strongest correlation with total muscle volume (<i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.85), followed by femur volume, height × mass, mass, height, and BMI. At the individual muscle level, the associated bone volume consistently explained more variance in muscle size than anthropometric predictors. Correlations between muscle volume and body-size parameters were significantly different between males and females, whereas bone-volume correlations showed no significant sex differences. These results suggest that skeletal dimensions-reflecting an individual's "frame size"-are stronger determinants of muscularity than body size metrics and explain the observed sex differences in muscle sizes. This work presents a comprehensive in vivo muscle-level dataset to date, introduces a novel framework for analyzing muscle-bone correlations, and provides reference data for applications from clinical diagnostics to athletic performance and musculoskeletal modeling.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> This study presents the most comprehensive in vivo dataset of full-body muscle and bone volumes in healthy adults, showing that skeletal dimensions are the strongest predictors of muscularity, with height × mass emerging as the second-best predictor.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
2025-12-05
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00772.2025
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Nutrition and Health in Aging
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.16
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Big bones mean big muscles: an MRI-based dataset of muscle-bone-body size relationships across 70 human muscles of the upper limb, trunk, and lower limb

L Rekate Harold, Rajesh Shah, Jacob M. Morris, Ashley Coggins et al.
1 citations
Journal of Applied Physiology
Nutrition and Health in Aging
1.16
article

Big bones mean big muscles: an MRI-based dataset of muscle-bone-body size relationships across 70 human muscles of the upper limb, trunk, and lower limb

L Rekate Harold, Rajesh Shah, Jacob M. Morris, Ashley Coggins, Olivia DuCharme, Mike Rhodes, Robert A. Hein, Wim Derave, Matthew Cousins, Xue Feng, Michael D. Nelson, Lara Riem, Silvia S. Blemker, Megan Pinette, Kathryn Eve Costanzo, Eline Llevens, Savannah D. Benusa, Tim Breeding, Valeria Pabon
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Body sizes and shapes vary widely, even among healthy adults, resulting in diverse muscle sizes, strengths, and performance capacities. This study developed an artificially intelligent (AI) algorithm to segment individual muscles and bones from whole body MRI scans of 102 healthy adults (49 males, 53 females) aged 18-50 yr, generating three-dimensional (3-D) segmentations of 70 muscles and 13 bones spanning the upper limbs, trunk, and lower limbs. We quantified muscle volume, asymmetry, and fat fraction at whole body, regional, and individual-muscle levels, and examined how these properties correlate with body size and skeletal dimensions. Fat fraction and asymmetry varied across muscles and were generally similar between sexes; however, the distribution of muscle volume across the body differed between females and males. Across all predictors tested, total bone volume showed the strongest correlation with total muscle volume (<i>r</i><sup>2</sup> = 0.85), followed by femur volume, height × mass, mass, height, and BMI. At the individual muscle level, the associated bone volume consistently explained more variance in muscle size than anthropometric predictors. Correlations between muscle volume and body-size parameters were significantly different between males and females, whereas bone-volume correlations showed no significant sex differences. These results suggest that skeletal dimensions-reflecting an individual's "frame size"-are stronger determinants of muscularity than body size metrics and explain the observed sex differences in muscle sizes. This work presents a comprehensive in vivo muscle-level dataset to date, introduces a novel framework for analyzing muscle-bone correlations, and provides reference data for applications from clinical diagnostics to athletic performance and musculoskeletal modeling.<b>NEW & NOTEWORTHY</b> This study presents the most comprehensive in vivo dataset of full-body muscle and bone volumes in healthy adults, showing that skeletal dimensions are the strongest predictors of muscularity, with height × mass emerging as the second-best predictor.

Journal of Applied PhysiologyVol. 140(1)
The University of Texas at Arlington (US), Ghent University Hospital (BE), University of Virginia (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Nutrition and Health in Aging
1.16
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.