Literature DB >> 30517039

Dissociation of muscle and cortical response scaling to balance perturbation acceleration.

Aiden M Payne1, Greg Hajcak2, Lena H Ting1,3.   

Abstract

The role of cortical activity in standing balance is unclear. Here we tested whether perturbation-evoked cortical responses share sensory input with simultaneous balance-correcting muscle responses. We hypothesized that the acceleration-dependent somatosensory signals that drive the initial burst of the muscle automatic postural response also drive the simultaneous perturbation-evoked cortical N1 response. We measured in healthy young adults ( n = 16) the initial burst of the muscle automatic postural response (100-200 ms), startle-related muscle responses (100-200 ms), and the perturbation-evoked cortical N1 potential, i.e., a negative peak in cortical EEG activity (100-200 ms) over the supplementary motor area. Forward and backward translational support-surface balance perturbations were applied at four levels of acceleration and were unpredictable in timing, direction, and acceleration. Our results from averaged and single-trial analyses suggest that although cortical and muscle responses are evoked by the same perturbation stimulus, their amplitudes are independently modulated. Although both muscle and cortical responses increase with acceleration, correlations between single-trial muscle and cortical responses were very weak. Furthermore, across subjects, the scaling of muscle responses to acceleration did not correspond to scaling of cortical responses to acceleration. Moreover, we observed a reduction in cortical response amplitude across trials that was related to a reduction in startle-related-but not balance-correcting-muscle activity. Therefore, cortical response attenuation may be related to a reduction in perceived threat rather than motor adaptation or changes in sensory inflow. We conclude that the cortical N1 reflects integrated sensory inputs simultaneously related to brain stem-mediated balance-correcting muscle responses and startle reflexes. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Reactive balance recovery requires sensory inputs to be transformed into appropriate balance-correcting motor responses via brain stem circuits; these are accompanied by simultaneous and poorly understood cortical responses. We used single-trial analyses to dissociate muscle and cortical response modulation with perturbation acceleration. Although muscle and cortical responses share sensory inputs, they have independent scaling mechanisms. Attenuation of cortical responses with experience reflected attenuation of brain stem-mediated startle responses rather than the amplitude of balance-correcting motor responses.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EEG; EMG; adaptation; balance N1; habituation; posture; startle

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30517039      PMCID: PMC6520627          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00237.2018

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


  42 in total

1.  Cortical representation of whole-body movement is modulated by proprioceptive discharge in humans.

Authors:  W R Staines; W E McIlroy; J D Brooke
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Cortical activation following a balance disturbance.

Authors:  S Quant; A L Adkin; W R Staines; W E McIlroy
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-02-14       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 3.  Cortical control of postural responses.

Authors:  J V Jacobs; F B Horak
Journal:  J Neural Transm (Vienna)       Date:  2007-03-29       Impact factor: 3.575

4.  Fusimotor drive may adjust muscle spindle feedback to task requirements in humans.

Authors:  Edith Ribot-Ciscar; Valérie Hospod; Jean-Pierre Roll; Jean-Marc Aimonetti
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-11-26       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Generalizability of perturbation-evoked cortical potentials: Independence from sensory, motor and overall postural state.

Authors:  George Mochizuki; Kathryn M Sibley; Hannah J Cheung; Joanne M Camilleri; William E McIlroy
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2008-12-24       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 6.  Does startle explain the exaggerated first response to a transient perturbation?

Authors:  Gunter P Siegmund; Jean-Sébastien Blouin; J Timothy Inglis
Journal:  Exerc Sport Sci Rev       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 6.230

7.  Cortical responses associated with the preparation and reaction to full-body perturbations to upright stability.

Authors:  G Mochizuki; K M Sibley; J G Esposito; J M Camilleri; W E McIlroy
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-05-13       Impact factor: 3.708

8.  EEG measures reveal dual-task interference in postural performance in young adults.

Authors:  C Elaine Little; Marjorie Woollacott
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-10-02       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 9.  What startles tell us about control of posture and gait.

Authors:  Jorik Nonnekes; Mark G Carpenter; J Timothy Inglis; Jacques Duysens; Vivian Weerdesteyn
Journal:  Neurosci Biobehav Rev       Date:  2015-04-13       Impact factor: 8.989

10.  Automatic postural responses are delayed by pyridoxine-induced somatosensory loss.

Authors:  Paul J Stapley; Lena H Ting; Manuel Hulliger; Jane M Macpherson
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2002-07-15       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  10 in total

Review 1.  Do sensorimotor perturbations to standing balance elicit an error-related negativity?

Authors:  Aiden M Payne; Lena H Ting; Greg Hajcak
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 4.016

2.  Balance perturbation-evoked cortical N1 responses are larger when stepping and not influenced by motor planning.

Authors:  Aiden M Payne; Lena H Ting
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-10-14       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Worse balance is associated with larger perturbation-evoked cortical responses in healthy young adults.

Authors:  Aiden M Payne; Lena H Ting
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2020-06-15       Impact factor: 2.840

4.  Lower Cognitive Set Shifting Ability Is Associated With Stiffer Balance Recovery Behavior and Larger Perturbation-Evoked Cortical Responses in Older Adults.

Authors:  Aiden M Payne; Jacqueline A Palmer; J Lucas McKay; Lena H Ting
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 5.750

5.  Toward passive BCI: asynchronous decoding of neural responses to direction- and angle-specific perturbations during a simulated cockpit scenario.

Authors:  Shayan Jalilpour; Gernot Müller-Putz
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-04-26       Impact factor: 4.996

6.  The cortical N1 response to balance perturbation is associated with balance and cognitive function in different ways between older adults with and without Parkinson's disease.

Authors:  Aiden M Payne; J Lucas McKay; Lena H Ting
Journal:  Cereb Cortex Commun       Date:  2022-07-22

7.  Long-Lasting Event-Related Beta Synchronizations of Electroencephalographic Activity in Response to Support-Surface Perturbations During Upright Stance: A Pilot Study Associating Beta Rebound and Active Monitoring in the Intermittent Postural Control.

Authors:  Akihiro Nakamura; Yasuyuki Suzuki; Matija Milosevic; Taishin Nomura
Journal:  Front Syst Neurosci       Date:  2021-05-21

8.  Cortical responses to whole-body balance perturbations index perturbation magnitude and predict reactive stepping behavior.

Authors:  Teodoro Solis-Escalante; Mitchel Stokkermans; Michael X Cohen; Vivian Weerdesteyn
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2020-09-20       Impact factor: 3.698

9.  Cortical Beta Oscillatory Activity Evoked during Reactive Balance Recovery Scales with Perturbation Difficulty and Individual Balance Ability.

Authors:  Nina J Ghosn; Jacqueline A Palmer; Michael R Borich; Lena H Ting; Aiden M Payne
Journal:  Brain Sci       Date:  2020-11-16

10.  Cortical Engagement Metrics During Reactive Balance Are Associated With Distinct Aspects of Balance Behavior in Older Adults.

Authors:  Jacqueline A Palmer; Aiden M Payne; Lena H Ting; Michael R Borich
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 5.750

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.