Literature DB >> 27121579

Hypothesis: Hughlings Jackson and presynaptic inhibition: is there a big picture?

Alan J McComas1.   

Abstract

Presynaptic inhibition is a very powerful inhibitory mechanism and, despite many detailed studies, its purpose is still only partially understood. One accepted function is that, by reducing afferent inflow to the spinal cord and brainstem, the tonic level of presynaptic inhibition prevents sensory systems from being overloaded. A corollary of this function is that much of the incoming sensory data from peripheral receptors must be redundant, and this conclusion is reinforced by observations on patients with sensory neuropathies or congenital obstetric palsy in whom normal sensation may be preserved despite loss of sensory fibers. The modulation of incoming signals by presynaptic inhibition has a further function in operating a "gate" in the dorsal horn, thereby determining whether peripheral stimuli are likely to be perceived as painful. On the motor side, the finding that even minimal voluntary movement of a single toe is associated with widespread inhibition in the lumbosacral cord points to another function for presynaptic inhibition: to prevent reflex perturbations from interfering with motor commands. This last function, together with the normal suppression of muscle and cutaneous reflex activity at rest, is consistent with Hughlings Jackson's concept of evolving neural hierarchies, with each level inhibiting the one below it.
Copyright © 2016 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hughlings Jackson; presynaptic inhibition; reflexes

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27121579      PMCID: PMC4961749          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00371.2015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  70 in total

1.  Central inhibitory action attributable to presynaptic depolarization produced by muscle afferent volleys.

Authors:  J C ECCLES; R M ECCLES; F MAGNI
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1961-11       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Réflexes de défense. By J. Babinski, Brain 1922: 45; 149-184; with The physiological significance of the reflex phenomena in spastic paralysis of the lower limbs. By F. M. R. Walshe, Brain 1914: 37; 269-336; and The Babinski plantar response, its forms, and its physiological and pathological significance. By F. M. R. Walshe, Brain 1956: 79; 529-556.

Authors:  Jan van Gijn
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 13.501

3.  Movement-induced gain modulation of somatosensory potentials and soleus H-reflexes evoked from the leg. I. Kinaesthetic task demands.

Authors:  W R Staines; J D Brooke; J Cheng; J E Misiaszek; W A MacKay
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Gating of sensory input at spinal and cortical levels during preparation and execution of voluntary movement.

Authors:  Kazuhiko Seki; Eberhard E Fetz
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Are spinal "presynaptic" inhibitory mechanisms suppressed in spasticity?

Authors:  D Burke; P Ashby
Journal:  J Neurol Sci       Date:  1972-03       Impact factor: 3.181

6.  Modulation of presynaptic inhibition of la afferents during voluntary wrist flexion and extension in man.

Authors:  C Aymard; M Baret; R Katz; C Lafitte; A Pénicaud; S Raoul
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Control of impulse conduction in long range branches of afferents by increases and decreases of primary afferent depolarization in the rat.

Authors:  P D Wall
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  1994-07-01       Impact factor: 3.386

8.  Primary afferent depolarization evoked by the activity of spinal scratching generator.

Authors:  K V Bayev; P G Kostyuk
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 3.590

9.  Polarization of primary afferent terminals of lumbosacral cord elicited by the activity of spinal locomotor generator.

Authors:  K V Bayev; P G Kostyuk
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  1982-06       Impact factor: 3.590

10.  Presynaptic inhibition of spinal sensory feedback ensures smooth movement.

Authors:  Andrew J P Fink; Katherine R Croce; Z Josh Huang; L F Abbott; Thomas M Jessell; Eiman Azim
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2014-05-01       Impact factor: 49.962

View more
  3 in total

1.  Gain control in the sensorimotor system.

Authors:  Eiman Azim; Kazuhiko Seki
Journal:  Curr Opin Physiol       Date:  2019-03-22

2.  Quantitative input-output relationships between human soleus muscle spindle afferents and motoneurons.

Authors:  Alan McComas; Hubert deBruin; Winnie Fu
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-11-29       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Modulation of tactile feedback for the execution of dexterous movement.

Authors:  Andrew Bohannon; Masakazu Igarashi; James M Conner; James Taniguchi; Nicholas Baltar; Eiman Azim
Journal:  Science       Date:  2021-10-14       Impact factor: 47.728

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.