To investigate whether visuomotor integration processes induce long-term potentiation (LTP) and depression (LTD)-like plasticity in the primary motor cortex (M1), we designed a new paired associative stimulation (PAS) protocol coupling left primary visual area (V1) activation achieved by hemifield visual evoked potentials (VEPs) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the left M1, at specific interstimulus intervals (ISIs), delivered at 1 Hz (V-PAS). Before and after V-PAS, we measured motor evoked potentials (MEPs). To clarify the mechanisms underlying V-PAS, we tested the effect of 1-Hz repetitive TMS (rTMS), 0.25-Hz V-PAS and rTMS, and a shorter 0.25-Hz V-PAS protocol. To examine V-PAS with contralateral V1 activation, we delivered V-PAS activating the right V1. To clarify whether V-PAS increases V1 activity or parieto- and premotor-to-M1 connectivity, before and after V-PAS, we examined VEPs and MEPs evoked by paired-pulse techniques. V-PAS increased, decreased, or left MEPs unchanged according to the ISI used. After 1-Hz rTMS MEPs decreased. Although 0.25-Hz rTMS elicited no aftereffect, 0.25-Hz V-PAS modulated MEPs according to the ISI used. The short 0.25-Hz V-PAS protocol left MEPs unchanged. Contralateral V-PAS inhibited MEPs. After V-PAS, VEPs remained unchanged and the premotor-to-M1 inhibitory connections decreased. V-PAS induces M1 LTP/LTD-like plasticity by activating premotor-to-motor connections.

No abstract

The capacity to rapidly suppress a behavioral act in response to sudden instruction to stop is a key cognitive function. This function, called reactive control, is tested in experimental settings using the stop signal task, which requires subjects to generate a movement in response to a go signal or suppress it when a stop signal appears. The ability to inhibit this movement fluctuates over time: sometimes, subjects can stop their response, and at other times, they can not. To determine the neural basis of this fluctuation, we recorded local field potentials (LFPs) in the alpha (6–12 Hz) and beta (13–35 Hz) bands from the dorsal premotor cortex of two nonhuman primates that were performing the task. The ability to countermand a movement after a stop signal was predicted by the activity of both bands, each purportedly representing a distinct neural process. The beta band represents the level of movement preparation; higher beta power corresponds to a lower level of movement preparation, whereas the alpha band supports a proper phasic, reactive inhibitory response: movements are inhibited when alpha band power increases immediately after a stop signal. Our findings support the function of LFP bands in generating the signatures of various neural computations that are multiplexed in the brain.

No abstract

Major achievements of primate evolution are skilled hand-object interaction and tool use, both in part dependent on parietal cortex expansion. We recorded spiking activity from macaque inferior parietal cortex during directional manipulation of an isometric tool, which required the application of hand forces to control a cursor's motion on a screen. In areas PFG/PF, the activity of ϳ70% neurons was modulated by the hand force necessary to implement the desired target motion, reflecting an inverse model, rather than by the intended motion of the visual cursor (forward model). The population vector matched the direction and amplitude of the instantaneous force increments over time. When exposed to a new force condition, that obliged the monkey to change the force output to successfully bring the cursor to the final target, the activity of a consistent subpopulation of neurons changed in an orderly fashion and, at the end of a "Wash-out" session, retained memory of the new learned association, at the service of predictive control of force. Our findings suggest that areas PFG/PF represent a crucial node of the distributed control of hand force, by encoding instantaneous force variations and serving as a memory reservoir of hand dynamics required for object manipulation and tool use. This is coherent with previous studies in humans showing the following: (1) impaired adaptation to a new force field under TMS parietal perturbation; (2) defective control of direction of hand force after parietal lesion; and (3) fMRI activation of parietal cortex during object manipulation requiring control of fine hand forces.