ArticleExperimental brain research2026
Proximo-distal gradient of spinal recurrent inhibition: implications for motor pool fractionation and dexterity.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal recurrent inhibition (RI), mediated by Renshaw cells, exhibits a highly conserved proximal-to-distal gradient across mammals: it is robust in proximal motoneuron (MN) pools but absent in MNs innervating both extrinsic and intrinsic digit muscles. Although this organizational pattern has been recognised for more than six decades, its mechanistic basis has remained unexplained. The widely accepted view that the gradient reflects the evolutionary emergence of monosynaptic corticomotoneuronal (CM) projections is challenged by the cat, which lacks monosynaptic CM input to digit MNs yet exhibits the same RI gradient observed in primates. We performed a comparative quantitative analysis of 16 published MN pools from humans, macaque monkeys, and cats. Four nested nonlinear regression models and a Bayesian hierarchical errors-in-variables model were used to evaluate the relative contributions of CM input and recurrent collateral density to normalised RI strength. The robustness of the CM contribution was assessed through Bayesian prior sensitivity analyses using both HalfNormal and symmetric Normal priors. Recurrent collateral density provided the strongest explanation for the conserved RI gradient, accounting for 97.7% of the cross-species variance (NLS R
Indexed as
Identifiers
42645511What 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.