Considering the embryological development of limbs are the muscles that make up your legs the same muscles that make up your arms?
And in relation to comparative anatomy do mammals all have the same muscles only differently oriented in position and length?
I think you need to be a little more clear with what you’re asking. They’re obviously different muscles, and they’re obviously similar. What precisely do you mean by “synonymous”?
Synonymous, like are your knees really called your elbows, like that.
Or if you call your thighs your biceps, will they answer?
There’s some similarity, but not as much in, say, an orangutan, who essentially has four limbs for moving around the treetops. Our legs are specialized for walking and running on two feet for long periods, and our arms are specialized for throwing.
We don’t have elbowcaps.
The answer to your second question is pretty much yes. People’s arms and legs are homologous to other mammals’ limbs. Your arm and hand bone structure is closer to some animals’ structure than others. Therefore, I’m sure the muscles in, say, a bat’s limbs are closer to ours in structure and nomenclature than a hoofed animal’s, since the hoofer has a greater bone structure difference than the bat’s compared to ours.
To answer the first question, no, the muscles in the arms and legs are not really homologous. They have the same functions in extending and retracting the limbs, but they differ in size and placement. As a few obvious differences, in mammals the fore and hind legs flex in opposite directions. The forelegs attach to a shoulder girdle that in most mammals is not connected to the rest of the skeleton, while the hind legs attach to a socket joint in the pelvis. Obviously the muscles must have quite different arrangements.
This is not quite correct, or perhaps misleading. The muscle plan is basically the same, even if individual muscles sizes are going to vary between ape species. It’s not like an org has a completely different set of arm muscles from a human.
That has more to do with the forelimb and hind limb being rotated 180 degrees relative to each other than it has to do with structural differences along the length of each limb.
In the forelimb, the humerus attaches to a socket joint at the scapula. In many animals, such as the horse, the scapula is not directly connected to the rest of the skeleton, but is instead held in place via the shoulder girdle.
Yes, the limbs are structurally similar but the rotation results in differences in the musculature along each set of limbs.
Basically what I said. Primates are one of the few groups of mammals that retain a connection between the forelimb and the rest of the skeleton via the clavicle.