Literature DB >> 15575492

Interactions between cognitive and sensorimotor functions in the motor cortex: evidence from the preparatory motor sets anticipating a perturbation.

Mireille Bonnard1, Jozina de Graaf, Jean Pailhous.   

Abstract

The many signs of cognitive processes in the activation pattern of the primary motor cortex or in corticospinal (CS) excitability gave rise to the idea that the motor cortex is a crucial node in the processing of cognitive information related to sensorimotor functions. Moreover, it became clear that the preparatory motor sets offer a privileged window to investigate the interaction between cognitive and sensorimotor function in the motor cortex. In the present review, we examine how the study of the preparatory motor sets anticipating a mechanical movement perturbation contributes to enlightening this question. Following the initial observation made by Hammond that some components of the stretch reflex can be modulated by a prior intention either to resist or to relax in response to a subsequent perturbation, first evidence of the phenomenon was obtained in behaving monkeys. Moreover, this study related this peripheral fact to the observed anticipatory activity of motor cortex neurons after a prior instruction telling the animal how to respond to the subsequent perturbation, which triggered the instructed movement. Indeed, this anticipatory activity was found to be different according to the instruction. In the 1980s, this work inspired a lot of studies in human beings that brought support to the idea of a cognitive tuning of the long latency stretch response (LLSR). Specifically, the MI component of the response was shown to be modulated by a prior intent to resist versus to let go when faced with the perturbation. Recently, new approaches have been developed to obtain evidence of a cognitive tuning of CS excitability, thanks to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). TMS has been used both as a reliable tool for quantifying the CS excitability via the motor evoked potentials (MEPs), and to centrally perturb the organization of movement. Such central perturbations offer the unique opportunity to activate the descending motor tracts while shunting, for a short time period, the ascending tracts assisting the movement. Thus, CS excitability was measured before the movement was perturbed. These studies demonstrated the readiness of the CS tract to be involved in anticipatory compensatory responses to central movement perturbations induced by TMS in relation to the subject's cognitive attitudes. The question of the cerebral regions upstream of the motor cortex that could be responsible for this modulation in CS excitability remains largely open.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15575492     DOI: 10.1515/revneuro.2004.15.5.371

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Neurosci        ISSN: 0334-1763            Impact factor:   4.353


  8 in total

1.  Preparing for a motor perturbation: early implication of primary motor and somatosensory cortices.

Authors:  Jozina B de Graaf; Alexey Frolov; Michel Fiocchi; Bruno Nazarian; Jean-Luc Anton; Jean Pailhous; Mireille Bonnard
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Diffuse optical tomography of pain and tactile stimulation: activation in cortical sensory and emotional systems.

Authors:  L Becerra; W Harris; D Joseph; T Huppert; D A Boas; D Borsook
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2008-02-14       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 3.  Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for clinical applications in neurological and psychiatric disorders: an overview.

Authors:  Sergio Machado; Oscar Arias-Carrión; Flávia Paes; Renata Teles Vieira; Leonardo Caixeta; Felipe Novaes; Tamires Marinho; Leonardo Ferreira Almada; Adriana Cardoso Silva; Antonio Egidio Nardi
Journal:  Eurasian J Med       Date:  2013-10

4.  National Athletic Trainers' Association Position Statement: Reducing Intentional Head-First Contact Behavior in American Football Players.

Authors:  Erik E Swartz; Johna K Register-Mihalik; Steven P Broglio; Jason P Mihalik; Jay L Myers; Kevin M Guskiewicz; Julian Bailes; Merril Hoge
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 2.860

5.  EMG responses to unexpected perturbations are delayed in slower movements.

Authors:  Fabian J David; Cynthia Poon; Chuanxin M Niu; Daniel M Corcos; Mark B Shapiro
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-08-22       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Influence of age on neuromuscular control during a dynamic weight-bearing task.

Authors:  Sangeetha Madhavan; Sarah Burkart; Gail Baggett; Katie Nelson; Trina Teckenburg; Mike Zwanziger; Richard K Shields
Journal:  J Aging Phys Act       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 1.961

7.  Visually-updated hand state estimates modulate the proprioceptive reflex independently of motor task requirements.

Authors:  Sho Ito; Hiroaki Gomi
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 8.140

8.  The StartReact effect on self-initiated movements.

Authors:  J M Castellote; M E L Van den Berg; J Valls-Solé
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-09-11       Impact factor: 3.411

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.