Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24717348›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2014

Variation in motor output and motor performance in a centrally generated motor pattern.

Angela Wenning, Brian J Norris, Anca Doloc-Mihu, Ronald L Calabrese

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Successful and unsuccessful attempts to swallow in a reducedLearning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2019
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The neural control of heartbeat in invertebrates.Current opinion in neurobiology · 2016
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Angela WenningDepartment of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; and awennin@emory.edu.
Brian J NorrisDepartment of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; and Department of Biological Sciences, California State University, San Marcos, California.
Anca Doloc-MihuDepartment of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; and.
Ronald L CalabreseDepartment of Biology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia; and.
Emory University · USCalifornia State University, San Marcos · US

Funding

Constancy and Variability in a Motor Program: CPG to Motor PerformanceR01NS085006 · NINDS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI CALABRESE, RONALD L · 2013 to 2016
$1.3M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS-085006NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS085006
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Central pattern generators (CPGs) produce motor patterns that ultimately drive motor outputs. We studied how functional motor performance is achieved, specifically, whether the variation seen in motor patterns is reflected in motor performance and whether fictive motor patterns differ from those in vivo. We used the leech heartbeat system in which a bilaterally symmetrical CPG coordinates segmental heart motor neurons and two segmented heart tubes into two mutually exclusive coordination modes: rear-to-front peristaltic on one side and nearly synchronous on the other, with regular side-to-side switches. We assessed individual variability of the motor pattern and the beat pattern in vivo. To quantify the beat pattern we imaged intact adults. To quantify the phase relations between motor neurons and heart constrictions we recorded extracellularly from two heart motor neurons and movement from the corresponding heart segments in minimally dissected leeches. Variation in the motor pattern was reflected in motor performance only in the peristaltic mode, where larger intersegmental phase differences in the motor neurons resulted in larger phase differences between heart constrictions. Fictive motor patterns differed from those in vivo only in the synchronous mode, where intersegmental phase differences in vivo had a larger front-to-rear bias and were more constrained. Additionally, load-influenced constriction timing might explain the amplification of the phase differences between heart segments in the peristaltic mode and the higher variability in motor output due to body shape assumed in this soft-bodied animal. The motor pattern determines the beat pattern, peristaltic or synchronous, but heart mechanics influence the phase relations achieved.

Indexed as

Myocardial ContractionAnimalsCentral Pattern GeneratorsHeartLeechesMotor Neuronsintersegmental coordinationleechmotor pattern in vivomotor performancevariability

Identifiers

PMID24717348
PMCPMC4064392
OpenAlexW1989636183

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.