Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32691053›Full record

ArticleCerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991)2020

Distributed Motor Control of Limb Movements in Rat Motor and Somatosensory Cortex: The Sensorimotor Amalgam Revisited.

Andrew C Halley, Mary K L Baldwin, Dylan F Cooke, Mackenzie Englund, Leah Krubitzer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Hindlimb Representation in the Spiny Mouse Sensorimotor Cortex.The Journal of comparative neurology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Multiple cortical systems influence a single vibrissa muscle.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Distinctive Effects of D1 and D2 Receptor Agonists on Cortico-Basal Ganglia Oscillations in a Rodent Model of L-DOPA-Induced Dyskinesia.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2023
    Article
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

5 authors.

Andrew C HalleyCenter for Neuroscience, University of California, Davis, CA 95618, USA.
Mary K L BaldwinCenter for Neuroscience, University of California, Davis, CA 95618, USA.
Dylan F CookeBiomedical Physiology and Kinesiology, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada.
Mackenzie EnglundDepartment of Psychology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Leah KrubitzerCenter for Neuroscience, University of California, Davis, CA 95618, USA.

Funding

Vision Science Training Program: Cornea to CortexT32EY015387 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS · PI MARIE E BURNS · 2003 to 2026
$4.8M
NEI NIH HHS T32 EY015387
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Which areas of the neocortex are involved in the control of movement, and how is motor cortex organized across species? Recent studies using long-train intracortical microstimulation demonstrate that in addition to M1, movements can be elicited from somatosensory regions in multiple species. In the rat, M1 hindlimb and forelimb movement representations have long been thought to overlap with somatosensory representations of the hindlimb and forelimb in S1, forming a partial sensorimotor amalgam. Here we use long-train intracortical microstimulation to characterize the movements elicited across frontal and parietal cortex. We found that movements of the hindlimb, forelimb, and face can be elicited from both M1 and histologically defined S1 and that representations of limb movement types are different in these two areas. Stimulation of S1 generates retraction of the contralateral forelimb, while stimulation of M1 evokes forelimb elevation movements that are often bilateral, including a rostral region of digit grasping. Hindlimb movement representations include distinct regions of hip flexion and hindlimb retraction evoked from S1 and hip extension evoked from M1. Our data indicate that both S1 and M1 are involved in the generation of movement types exhibited during natural behavior. We draw on these results to reconsider how sensorimotor cortex evolved.

Indexed as

MovementAnimalsElectric StimulationFemaleForelimbHindlimbMaleMotor CortexRats, Sprague-DawleySomatosensory Cortexevolutionmotorratsensorimotorstimulation

Identifiers

PMID32691053
PMCPMC8248848

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.