Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16354932›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2005

Spinal cord-transected mice learn to step in response to quipazine treatment and robotic training.

Andy J Fong, Lance L Cai, Chad K Otoshi, David J Reinkensmeyer, Joel W Burdick, Roland R Roy, V Reggie Edgerton

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

76 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 136 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Adenosine AMolecular neurobiology · 2019
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Andy J FongBiomedical Engineering Interdepartmental Program, University of California, Los Angeles, California 90095, USA.
Lance L Cai
Chad K Otoshi
David J Reinkensmeyer
Joel W Burdick
Roland R Roy
V Reggie Edgerton
Bioengineering Center · RUUniversity of California, Los Angeles · USInstitute of Neurobiology · BGUniversity of California, Irvine · US

Funding

USE DEPENDENT MOLECULAR MODULATION OF RAT HINDLIMB MUSCLESP01NS016333 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI ROY, ROLAND R · 1985 to 2007
$9.9M
Serotonergic Facilitation &Robotics in Spinal LearningR01HD044830 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI EDGERTON, REGGIE · 2003 to 2007
$1.7M
NICHD NIH HHS HD44830NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD044830NINDS NIH HHS NS16333NINDS NIH HHS P01 NS016333
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the present study, concurrent treatment with robotic step training and a serotonin agonist, quipazine, generated significant recovery of locomotor function in complete spinal cord-transected mice (T7-T9) that otherwise could not step. The extent of recovery achieved when these treatments were combined exceeded that obtained when either treatment was applied independently. We quantitatively analyzed the stepping characteristics of spinal mice after alternatively administering no training, manual training, robotic training, quipazine treatment, or a combination of robotic training with quipazine treatment, to examine the mechanisms by which training and quipazine treatment promote functional recovery. Using fast Fourier transform and principal components analysis, significant improvements in the step rhythm, step shape consistency, and number of weight-bearing steps were observed in robotically trained compared with manually trained or nontrained mice. In contrast, manual training had no effect on stepping performance, yielding no improvement compared with nontrained mice. Daily bolus quipazine treatment acutely improved the step shape consistency and number of steps executed by both robotically trained and nontrained mice, but these improvements did not persist after quipazine was withdrawn. At the dosage used (0.5 mg/kg body weight), quipazine appeared to facilitate, rather than directly generate, stepping, by enabling the spinal cord neural circuitry to process specific patterns of sensory information associated with weight-bearing stepping. Via this mechanism, quipazine treatment enhanced kinematically appropriate robotic training. When administered intermittently during an extended period of robotic training, quipazine revealed training-induced stepping improvements that were masked in the absence of the pharmacological treatment.

Indexed as

AnimalsLearningMicePsychomotor PerformanceQuipazineRoboticsSpinal Cord InjuriesWalkingQuipazine

Identifiers

PMID16354932
PMCPMC6726027
OpenAlexW2094191207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.