Preparation and execution of teeth clenching and foot muscle contraction influence on corticospinal hand-muscle excitability

Komeilipoor, Naeem; Ilmoniemi, Risto J.; Tiippana, Kaisa; Vainio, Martti; Tiainen, Mikko; Vainio, Lari

doi:10.1038/srep41249

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Z-scores were then averaged for each Direction and TMS-Intervals. Such transformation into z-scores has been already done in previous studies assessing modulation of corticospinal excitability during motor preparation [ 6 , 24 , 25 ], and is particularly relevant when testing proximal muscle because of the inter-subject variability in MEP amplitude.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulation of corticospinal output in agonist and antagonist proximal arm muscles during motor preparation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies have shown modulation of corticospinal output of the agonist muscle when a known-movement is prepared but withheld until a response signal appearance, reflecting motor preparation processes. However, modulation in the antagonist muscles has not been described, despite the fact that reaching movements require precise coordination between the activation of agonist and antagonist muscles. In this study, participants performed an instructed-delay reaction time (RT) task, with randomized elbow flexion and extension movements. The aim was to assess the time course modulation of corticospinal output in two antagonist muscles, by simultaneously quantified the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in biceps brachii and triceps brachii, and the amplitude and direction of elbow movements evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Depending on the prepared movement direction, a specific modulation of corticospinal output was observed, MEPs and TMS-evoked movements amplitude being relatively greater for extension compared to flexion. At the end of motor preparation, a decrease in MEPs amplitude was observed for both biceps brachii and triceps brachii, regardless of the prepared movement direction. In contrast, the probability of evoking movement in the flexion direction and the amplitude of TMS-evoked movement decreased at the end of preparation for flexion, but not for extension. Together, these results confirm the existence of inhibitory processes at the end of the motor preparation, probably to avoid a premature motor response. Moreover, they provide evidence of differences in the corticospinal control of elbow flexor and extensor muscles with patterns of modulation that are not necessarily reciprocal during motor preparation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modulation of corticospinal output in agonist and antagonist proximal arm muscles during motor preparation

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is well known that contraction of certain upper and lower limb muscles can modulate the corticospinal and spinal reflex motor circuits not only of the contracted muscle but also of other muscles that are located in a remote segment of the body and remain at rest (Tazoe and Komiyama 2014). Specifically, this phenomenon is known as "remote effect" or "cross-facilitation" (Komeilipoor et al 2017;Tazoe et al 2007aTazoe et al , 2007bTazoe and Komiyama 2014), whereas interlimb transfer (or "cross-education") is generally defined as unilateral training effects of one limb on improving strength/skills in the homologous muscle pairs on the untrained side (e.g., right arm and left arm) (Dragert and Zehr 2011;Yue and Cole 1992). Such mechanisms may contribute to coordination of interlimb movements via interneuronal circuits within the central nervous system.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interlimb neural interactions in corticospinal and spinal reflex circuits during preparation and execution of isometric elbow flexion

Sasaki

Kaneko

Masugi

et al. 2020

Journal of Neurophysiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although coordinated and simultaneous movement of upper- and lower-limb muscles is required for activities of daily living, interlimb neural interaction mechanisms and their nature are yet to be fully elucidated. The purpose of this study was to investigate effects of motor preparation and execution of ipsilateral, contralateral, and bilateral upper-limb muscle contractions on the excitability of corticospinal and spinal reflex circuits of the lower-limb muscles. Fourteen able-bodied individuals were recruited in each study. Experiments were conducted to investigate: (1) corticospinal excitability using transcranial magnetic stimulation applied on the primary motor cortex to evoke motor evoked potentials (MEPs); and (2) spinal reflex excitability using transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation applied at the lumbothoracic level to evoke spinal reflexes. Measurements were recorded from multiple right lower-limb muscles simultaneously during: (i) ipsilateral (right), (ii) contralateral (left), and (iii) bilateral (right and left) elbow flexion. The results indicate that MEPs in lower-limb muscles were facilitated during both preparation and execution of elbow flexion, while spinal reflexes were facilitated only during motor execution. Moreover, the extent of facilitation did not differ between right, left, and bilateral contractions. In conclusion, motor preparation for upper-limb muscle contractions did not affect spinal circuits, but seemed to affect the supraspinal networks controlling lower-limb muscles. However, actual contraction (motor execution) of upper-limb muscles is required to facilitate spinal reflex circuits controlling the lower-limb muscles. Moreover, interlimb remote facilitation in corticospinal and spinal reflex circuits did not depend on whether contralateral/ipsilateral hands were contracted or if they were contracted bilaterally.

show abstract

“…Further, digit muscles coordinate leading to a preference for simultaneous flexion or extension of fingers and toes (Muraoka, Sakamoto, Mizuguchi, Nakagawa, & Kanosue, 2015). Flexion of hand muscles and/or foot muscles can trigger mandible articulation so that, for example, a fist clench goes together with a jaw clench (Komeilipoor et al, 2017). Since coordination of hand articulations with other articulators in the body is well-documented, it would be surprising if a manual language did not exploit head- hand coordinations.…”

Section: General Discussion and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Expanding Echo: Coordinated Head Articulations as Nonmanual Enhancements in Sign Language Phonology

Loos

Napoli

2021

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Echo phonology was originally proposed to account for obligatory coordination of manual and mouth articulations observed in several sign languages. However, previous research into the phenomenon lacks clear criteria for which components of movement can or must be copied when the articulators are so different. Nor is there discussion of which nonmanual articulators can echo manual movement. Given the prosodic properties of echoes (coordination of onset/offset and of dynamics such as speed) as well as general motoric coordination of various articulators in the human body, we expect that the mouth is not the only nonmanual articulator involved in echo phonology. In this study, we look at a fixed set of lexical items across 36 sign languages and establish that the head can echo manual movement with respect to timing and to the axis/axes of manual movement. We propose that what matters in echo phonology is the visual percept of temporally coordinated movement that repeats a salient movement property in such a way as to give the visual impression of a copy. Our findings suggest that echoes are not obligatory motor couplings of two or more articulators but may enhance phonological distinctions that are otherwise difficult to see.

show abstract

Preparation and execution of teeth clenching and foot muscle contraction influence on corticospinal hand-muscle excitability

Cited by 14 publications

References 56 publications

Modulation of corticospinal output in agonist and antagonist proximal arm muscles during motor preparation

Modulation of corticospinal output in agonist and antagonist proximal arm muscles during motor preparation

Interlimb neural interactions in corticospinal and spinal reflex circuits during preparation and execution of isometric elbow flexion

Expanding Echo: Coordinated Head Articulations as Nonmanual Enhancements in Sign Language Phonology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About