ArticlePloS one2020
Biological data questions the support of the self inhibition required for pattern generation in the half center model.
Article in PloS one, 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Bcm rule allows a spinal cord model to learn rhythmic movements.Biological cybernetics · 2023Article
- A model for self-organization of sensorimotor function: spinal interneuronal integration.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Whole Body Coordination for Self-Assistance in Locomotion.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Locomotion control in mammals has been hypothesized to be governed by a central pattern generator (CPG) located in the circuitry of the spinal cord. The most common model of the CPG is the half center model, where two pools of neurons generate alternating, oscillatory activity. In this model, the pools reciprocally inhibit each other ensuring alternating activity. There is experimental support for reciprocal inhibition. However another crucial part of the half center model is a self inhibitory mechanism which prevents the neurons of each individual pool from infinite firing. Self-inhibition is hence necessary to obtain alternating activity. But critical parts of the experimental bases for the proposed mechanisms for self-inhibition were obtained in vitro, in preparations of juvenile animals. The commonly used adaptation of spike firing does not appear to be present in adult animals in vivo. We therefore modeled several possible self inhibitory mechanisms for locomotor control. Based on currently published data, previously proposed hypotheses of the self inhibitory mechanism, necessary to support the CPG hypothesis, seems to be put into question by functional evaluation tests or by in vivo data. This opens for alternative explanations of how locomotion activity patterns in the adult mammal could be generated.
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.