4.6 Article

Anticipatory changes in human motoneuron discharge patterns during motor preparation

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY-LONDON
卷 586, 期 4, 页码 1017-1028

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1113/jphysiol.2007.145318

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The influence of motor preparation on human motoneuron activity was studied by combining single motor unit recording techniques with reaction-time (RT) methods. The tonic activity of wrist extensor motor units associated with voluntary isometric contractions was analysed during preparation for a ballistic wrist extensor muscle contraction, using a time preparation procedure. Two durations of the preparatory period elapsing between the warning signal and the response signal were used in separate blocks of trials: a short preparatory period (1 s) allowing optimum time preparation, and a longer, non-optimum one (3 s). Changes in motoneuron tonic discharge patterns not associated with any changes in the force output were observed during the preparatory period, which suggests that these changes were subtle enough to prevent any changes in muscle contraction from occurring before the forthcoming movement. The changes observed were a lengthening of the mean interspike interval (ISI) and a decrease in the ISI variability. These data confirm that inhibitory mechanisms are activated during motor preparation and suggest that spinal inhibitory mechanisms are involved in the preparatory processes. The mechanisms possibly involved, such as presynaptic inhibition, dysfacilitation processes or AHP conductance changes, are discussed. The fact that the preparation-induced effects on motoneuron activity were particularly prominent during the last part of the 3 s preparatory period suggests that they were probably related to the neural processes underlying temporal estimation. The anticipatory changes in motoneuron activity observed here during preparation for action provide evidence that central influences act on spinal motoneurons well before it is time to act.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据