ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2020
Interhemispheric modulations of motor outputs by the rostral and caudal forelimb areas in rats.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cortico-striatal circuits for bilaterally coordinated movements.Science advances · 2022Article
- Rapid and Bihemispheric Reorganization of Neuronal Activity in Premotor Cortex after Brain Injury.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021Article
- A cortical injury model in a non-human primate to assess execution of reach and grasp actions: implications for recovery after traumatic brain injury.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In rats, forelimb movements are evoked from two cortical regions, the caudal and rostral forelimb areas (CFA and RFA, respectively). These areas are densely interconnected and RFA induces complex and powerful modulations of CFA outputs. CFA and RFA also have interhemispheric connections, and these areas from both hemispheres send projections to common targets along the motor axis, providing multiple potential sites of interactions for movement production. Our objective was to characterize how CFA and RFA in one hemisphere can modulate motor outputs of the opposite hemisphere. To do so, we used paired-pulse protocols with intracortical microstimulation techniques (ICMS), while recording electromyographic (EMG) activity of forelimb muscles in sedated rats. A subthreshold conditioning stimulation was applied in either CFA or RFA in one hemisphere simultaneously or before a suprathreshold test stimulation in either CFA or RFA in the opposite hemisphere. Both CFA and RFA tended to facilitate motor outputs with short (0-2.5 ms) or long (20-35 ms) delays between the conditioning and test stimuli. In contrast, they tended to inhibit motor outputs with intermediate delays, in particular 10 ms. When comparing the two areas, we found that facilitatory effects from RFA were more frequent and powerful than the ones from CFA. In contrast, inhibitory effects from CFA on its homolog were more frequent and powerful than the ones from RFA. Our results demonstrate that interhemispheric modulations from CFA and RFA share some similarities but also have clear differences that could sustain specific functions these cortical areas carry for the generation of forelimb movements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.