Measuring the motor output of the pontomedullary reticular formation in the monkey: Do stimulus-triggered averaging and stimulus trains produce comparable results in the upper limbs?

Wendy J. Herbert, Adam G. Davidson, John A. Buford

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    19 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The pontomedullary reticular formation (PMRF) of the monkey produces motor outputs to both upper limbs. EMG effects evoked from stimulus-triggered averaging (StimulusTA) were compared with effects from stimulus trains to determine whether both stimulation methods produced comparable results. Flexor and extensor muscles of scapulothoracic, shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints were studied bilaterally in two male M. fascicularis monkeys trained to perform a bilateral reaching task. The frequency of facilitation versus suppression responses evoked in the muscles was compared between methods. Stimulus trains were more efficient (94% of PMRF sites) in producing responses than StimulusTA (55%), and stimulus trains evoked responses from more muscles per site than from StimulusTA. Facilitation (72%) was more common from stimulus trains than StimulusTA (39%). In the overall results, a bilateral reciprocal activation pattern of ipsilateral flexor and contralateral extensor facilitation was evident for StimulusTA and stimulus trains. When the comparison was restricted to cases where both methods produced a response in a given muscle from the same site, agreement was very high, at 80%. For the remaining 20%, discrepancies were accounted for mainly by facilitation from stimulus trains when StimulusTA produced suppression, which was in agreement with the under-representation of suppression in the stimulus train data as a whole. To the extent that th stimulus train method may favor transmission through polysynaptic pathways, these results suggest that polysynaptic pathways from the PMRF more often produce facilitation in muscles that would typically demonstrate suppression with StimulusTA.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)271-283
    Number of pages13
    JournalExperimental Brain Research
    Volume203
    Issue number2
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Jun 2010

    Fingerprint

    Reticular Formation
    Upper Extremity
    Haplorhini
    Muscles
    Wrist Joint
    Elbow Joint
    Shoulder Joint

    Keywords

    • Electrical stimulation
    • Electromyography
    • Macaque
    • Reaching
    • Reticulospinal

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Neuroscience(all)

    Cite this

    Measuring the motor output of the pontomedullary reticular formation in the monkey : Do stimulus-triggered averaging and stimulus trains produce comparable results in the upper limbs? / Herbert, Wendy J.; Davidson, Adam G.; Buford, John A.

    In: Experimental Brain Research, Vol. 203, No. 2, 06.2010, p. 271-283.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{aa9f7f49bef14adfaef6187339dacd4e,
    title = "Measuring the motor output of the pontomedullary reticular formation in the monkey: Do stimulus-triggered averaging and stimulus trains produce comparable results in the upper limbs?",
    abstract = "The pontomedullary reticular formation (PMRF) of the monkey produces motor outputs to both upper limbs. EMG effects evoked from stimulus-triggered averaging (StimulusTA) were compared with effects from stimulus trains to determine whether both stimulation methods produced comparable results. Flexor and extensor muscles of scapulothoracic, shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints were studied bilaterally in two male M. fascicularis monkeys trained to perform a bilateral reaching task. The frequency of facilitation versus suppression responses evoked in the muscles was compared between methods. Stimulus trains were more efficient (94{\%} of PMRF sites) in producing responses than StimulusTA (55{\%}), and stimulus trains evoked responses from more muscles per site than from StimulusTA. Facilitation (72{\%}) was more common from stimulus trains than StimulusTA (39{\%}). In the overall results, a bilateral reciprocal activation pattern of ipsilateral flexor and contralateral extensor facilitation was evident for StimulusTA and stimulus trains. When the comparison was restricted to cases where both methods produced a response in a given muscle from the same site, agreement was very high, at 80{\%}. For the remaining 20{\%}, discrepancies were accounted for mainly by facilitation from stimulus trains when StimulusTA produced suppression, which was in agreement with the under-representation of suppression in the stimulus train data as a whole. To the extent that th stimulus train method may favor transmission through polysynaptic pathways, these results suggest that polysynaptic pathways from the PMRF more often produce facilitation in muscles that would typically demonstrate suppression with StimulusTA.",
    keywords = "Electrical stimulation, Electromyography, Macaque, Reaching, Reticulospinal",
    author = "Herbert, {Wendy J.} and Davidson, {Adam G.} and Buford, {John A.}",
    year = "2010",
    month = "6",
    doi = "10.1007/s00221-010-2231-5",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "203",
    pages = "271--283",
    journal = "Experimental Brain Research",
    issn = "0014-4819",
    publisher = "Springer Verlag",
    number = "2",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Measuring the motor output of the pontomedullary reticular formation in the monkey

    T2 - Do stimulus-triggered averaging and stimulus trains produce comparable results in the upper limbs?

    AU - Herbert, Wendy J.

    AU - Davidson, Adam G.

    AU - Buford, John A.

    PY - 2010/6

    Y1 - 2010/6

    N2 - The pontomedullary reticular formation (PMRF) of the monkey produces motor outputs to both upper limbs. EMG effects evoked from stimulus-triggered averaging (StimulusTA) were compared with effects from stimulus trains to determine whether both stimulation methods produced comparable results. Flexor and extensor muscles of scapulothoracic, shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints were studied bilaterally in two male M. fascicularis monkeys trained to perform a bilateral reaching task. The frequency of facilitation versus suppression responses evoked in the muscles was compared between methods. Stimulus trains were more efficient (94% of PMRF sites) in producing responses than StimulusTA (55%), and stimulus trains evoked responses from more muscles per site than from StimulusTA. Facilitation (72%) was more common from stimulus trains than StimulusTA (39%). In the overall results, a bilateral reciprocal activation pattern of ipsilateral flexor and contralateral extensor facilitation was evident for StimulusTA and stimulus trains. When the comparison was restricted to cases where both methods produced a response in a given muscle from the same site, agreement was very high, at 80%. For the remaining 20%, discrepancies were accounted for mainly by facilitation from stimulus trains when StimulusTA produced suppression, which was in agreement with the under-representation of suppression in the stimulus train data as a whole. To the extent that th stimulus train method may favor transmission through polysynaptic pathways, these results suggest that polysynaptic pathways from the PMRF more often produce facilitation in muscles that would typically demonstrate suppression with StimulusTA.

    AB - The pontomedullary reticular formation (PMRF) of the monkey produces motor outputs to both upper limbs. EMG effects evoked from stimulus-triggered averaging (StimulusTA) were compared with effects from stimulus trains to determine whether both stimulation methods produced comparable results. Flexor and extensor muscles of scapulothoracic, shoulder, elbow, and wrist joints were studied bilaterally in two male M. fascicularis monkeys trained to perform a bilateral reaching task. The frequency of facilitation versus suppression responses evoked in the muscles was compared between methods. Stimulus trains were more efficient (94% of PMRF sites) in producing responses than StimulusTA (55%), and stimulus trains evoked responses from more muscles per site than from StimulusTA. Facilitation (72%) was more common from stimulus trains than StimulusTA (39%). In the overall results, a bilateral reciprocal activation pattern of ipsilateral flexor and contralateral extensor facilitation was evident for StimulusTA and stimulus trains. When the comparison was restricted to cases where both methods produced a response in a given muscle from the same site, agreement was very high, at 80%. For the remaining 20%, discrepancies were accounted for mainly by facilitation from stimulus trains when StimulusTA produced suppression, which was in agreement with the under-representation of suppression in the stimulus train data as a whole. To the extent that th stimulus train method may favor transmission through polysynaptic pathways, these results suggest that polysynaptic pathways from the PMRF more often produce facilitation in muscles that would typically demonstrate suppression with StimulusTA.

    KW - Electrical stimulation

    KW - Electromyography

    KW - Macaque

    KW - Reaching

    KW - Reticulospinal

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77954425182&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77954425182&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1007/s00221-010-2231-5

    DO - 10.1007/s00221-010-2231-5

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 20379705

    AN - SCOPUS:77954425182

    VL - 203

    SP - 271

    EP - 283

    JO - Experimental Brain Research

    JF - Experimental Brain Research

    SN - 0014-4819

    IS - 2

    ER -