Proprioception in motor learning: : lessons from a deafferented subject

This document is the Accepted Manuscript version of the following article: N. Yousif, J. Cole, J. Rothwell, and J. Diedrichsen, ‘Proprioception in motor learning: lessons from a deafferented subject’, Experimental Brain Research, Vol. 233 (8): 2449-2459, August 2015. The final publication is available at Springer via https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-015-4315-8.Proprioceptive information arises from a variety of channels, including muscle, tendon, and skin afferents. It tells us where our static limbs are in space and how they are moving. It remains unclear however, how these proprioceptive modes contribute to motor learning. Here, we studied a subject (IW) who has lost large myelinated fibres below the neck and found that he was strongly impaired in sensing the static position of his upper limbs, when passively moved to an unseen location. When making reaching movements however, his ability to discriminate in which direction the trajectory had been diverted was unimpaired. This dissociation allowed us to test the involvement of static and dynamic proprioception in motor learning. We found that IW showed a preserved ability to adapt to force fields when visual feedback was present. He was even sensitive to the exact form of the force perturbation, responding appropriately to a velocity- or position-dependent force after a single perturbation. The ability to adapt to force fields was also preserved when visual feedback about the lateral perturbation of the hand was withdrawn. In this experiment, however, he did not exhibit a form of use-dependent learning, which was evident in the control participants as a drift of the intended direction of the reaching movement in the perturbed direction. This suggests that this form of learning may depend on static position sense at the end of the movement. Our results indicate that dynamic and static proprioception play dissociable roles in motor learning.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

Proprioception in motor learning: : lessons from a deafferented subject

This document is the Accepted Manuscript version of the following article: N. Yousif, J. Cole, J. Rothwell, and J. Diedrichsen, ‘Proprioception in motor learning: lessons from a deafferented subject’, Experimental Brain Research, Vol. 233 (8): 2449-2459, August 2015. The final publication is available at Springer via https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-015-4315-8.Proprioceptive information arises from a variety of channels, including muscle, tendon, and skin afferents. It tells us where our static limbs are in space and how they are moving. It remains unclear however, how these proprioceptive modes contribute to motor learning. Here, we studied a subject (IW) who has lost large myelinated fibres below the neck and found that he was strongly impaired in sensing the static position of his upper limbs, when passively moved to an unseen location. When making reaching movements however, his ability to discriminate in which direction the trajectory had been diverted was unimpaired. This dissociation allowed us to test the involvement of static and dynamic proprioception in motor learning. We found that IW showed a preserved ability to adapt to force fields when visual feedback was present. He was even sensitive to the exact form of the force perturbation, responding appropriately to a velocity- or position-dependent force after a single perturbation. The ability to adapt to force fields was also preserved when visual feedback about the lateral perturbation of the hand was withdrawn. In this experiment, however, he did not exhibit a form of use-dependent learning, which was evident in the control participants as a drift of the intended direction of the reaching movement in the perturbed direction. This suggests that this form of learning may depend on static position sense at the end of the movement. Our results indicate that dynamic and static proprioception play dissociable roles in motor learning.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

On the Use of TMS to Investigate the Pathophysiology of Neurodegenerative Diseases

Neurodegenerative diseases are a collection of disorders that result in the progressive degeneration and death of neurons. They are clinically heterogenous and can present as deficits in movement, cognition, executive function, memory, visuospatial awareness and language. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation tool that allows for the assessment of cortical function in vivo. We review how TMS has been used for the investigation of three neurodegenerative diseases that differ in their neuroanatomical axes: (1) Motor cortex—corticospinal tract (motor neuron diseases), (2) Non-motor cortical areas (dementias), and (3) Subcortical structures (parkinsonisms). We also make four recommendations that we hope will benefit the use of TMS in neurodegenerative diseases. Firstly, TMS has traditionally been limited by the lack of an objective output and so has been confined to stimulation of the motor cortex; this limitation can be overcome by the use of concurrent neuroimaging methods such as EEG. Given that neurodegenerative diseases progress over time, TMS measures should aim to track longitudinal changes, especially when the aim of the study is to look at disease progression and symptomatology. The lack of gold-standard diagnostic confirmation undermines the validity of findings in clinical populations. Consequently, diagnostic certainty should be maximized through a variety of methods including multiple, independent clinical assessments, imaging and fluids biomarkers, and post-mortem pathological confirmation where possible. There is great interest in understanding the mechanisms by which symptoms arise in neurodegenerative disorders. However, TMS assessments in patients are usually carried out during resting conditions, when the brain network engaged during these symptoms is not expressed. Rather, a context-appropriate form of TMS would be more suitable in probing the physiology driving clinical symptoms. In all, we hope that the recommendations made here will help to further understand the pathophysiology of neurodegenerative diseases

Participatory Data Collection Technique for Capturing Beginning Farmer Program Outcomes

This article describes an innovative evaluation plan we employed to capture outcomes of a multiyear beginning farmer program and, specifically, highlights the facilitation technique we used to document short-term and intermediate goals of the program that matched U.S. Department of Agriculture grant requirements and Extension administration priorities. Developing a comprehensive, two-phase evaluation plan based on a well-conceived logic model was a key factor in the success of the New FARM program. Our midterm and end-of-program evaluations addressed often sought, but sometimes difficult to obtain, intermediate goals from the logic model and demonstrated program effectiveness to a variety of funders

The New FARM Program: A Model for Supporting Diverse Emerging Farmers and Early-Career Extension Professionals

As early-career Extension educators challenged by societal, structural, agricultural, and fiscal trends, we designed a multiyear educational program to support the diverse needs of emerging specialty crop producers in northwest Michigan. This article presents outcomes of that program. We explore how Extension professionals can develop impactful programs that address the varied needs of the next generation of agricultural producers. We provide an overview of the New FARM program, addressing the rationale, program objectives, program logistics, evaluation results, and implications. We hope the New FARM program will serve as a useful model for early-career Extension professionals

Noninvasive Brain Stimulation and Noninvasive Peripheral Stimulation for Neglect Syndrome Following Acquired Brain Injury

OBJECTIVE: Hemispatial neglect is a frequent condition usually following nondominant hemispheric brain injury. It strongly affects rehabilitation strategies and everyday life activities. It is associated with behavioral and cognitive disability with a strong impact on patient's life. METHODS: We reviewed the published literature on the use of noninvasive brain stimulation, including repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and of noninvasive peripheral muscle stimulation, as therapeutic strategies for rehabilitation of neglect after acquired brain injury, such as in stroke or in traumatic injuries. The studies were grouped as controlled or uncontrolled studies in each stimulation techniques. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were identified and 16 on rTMS, 10 on tDCS, and 8 on vibration. All studies were conducted in adult patients who suffered a stroke, except for one that was conducted in a patient suffering traumatic acquired brain injury and another that was conducted in a patient with brain tumor. In spite of significant variability in treatment protocols, patients' features and assessment of neglect, improvement was reported in almost all studies with no side-effects. CONCLUSIONS: Noninvasive brain stimulation and neuromuscular vibration are promising therapeutic neuromodulatory approaches for neglect. Further randomized-controlled studies are needed to corroborate their effectiveness as separate and combined techniques

The role of contralesional dorsal premotor cortex after stroke as studied with concurrent TMS-fMRI

Contralesional dorsal premotor cortex (cPMd) may support residual motor function following stroke. We performed two complementary experiments to explore how cPMd might perform this role in a group of chronic human stroke patients. First, we used paired-coil transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to establish the physiological influence of cPMd on ipsilesional primary motor cortex (iM1) at rest. We found that this influence became less inhibitory/more facilitatory in patients with greater clinical impairment. Second, we applied TMS over cPMd during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in these patients to examine the causal influence of cPMd TMS on the whole network of surviving cortical motor areas in either hemisphere and whether these influences changed during affected hand movement. We confirmed that hand grip-related activation in cPMd was greater in more impaired patients. Furthermore, the peak ipsilesional sensorimotor cortex activity shifted posteriorly in more impaired patients. Critical new findings were that concurrent TMS-fMRI results correlated with the level of both clinical impairment and neurophysiological impairment (i.e., less inhibitory/more facilitatory cPMd-iM1 measure at rest as assessed with paired-coil TMS). Specifically, greater clinical and neurophysiological impairment was associated with a stronger facilitatory influence of cPMd TMS on blood oxygenation level-dependent signal in posterior parts of ipsilesional sensorimotor cortex during hand grip, corresponding to the posteriorly shifted sensorimotor activity seen in more impaired patients. cPMd TMS was not found to influence activity in other brain regions in either hemisphere. This state-dependent influence on ipsilesional sensorimotor regions may provide a mechanism by which cPMd supports recovered function after stroke

Preconditioning stimulus intensity alters paired‐pulse tms evoked potentials

Motor cortex (M1) paired‐pulse TMS (ppTMS) probes excitatory and inhibitory intracor-tical dynamics by measurement of motor‐evoked potentials (MEPs). However, MEPs reflect cortical and spinal excitabilities and therefore cannot isolate cortical function. Concurrent TMS‐EEG has the ability to measure cortical function, while limiting peripheral confounds; TMS stimulates M1, whilst EEG acts as the readout: the TMS‐evoked potential (TEP). Whilst varying preconditioning stimulus intensity influences intracortical inhibition measured by MEPs, the effects on TEPs is undefined. TMS was delivered to the left M1 using single‐pulse and three, ppTMS paradigms, each using a different preconditioning stimulus: 70%, 80% or 90% of resting motor threshold. Corticospinal inhibition was present in all three ppTMS conditions. ppTMS TEP peaks were reduced predominantly under the ppTMS 70 protocol but less so for ppTMS 80 and not at all for ppTMS 90. There was a significant negative correlation between MEPs and N45 TEP peak for ppTMS 70 reaching statistical trends for ppTMS 80 and 90. Whilst ppTMS MEPs show inhibition across a range of preconditioning stimulus intensities, ppTMS TEPs do not. TEPs after M1 ppTMS vary as a function of preconditioning stimulus intensity: smaller preconditioning stimulus intensities result in better discriminability between conditioned and unconditioned TEPs. We recommend that preconditioning stimulus intensity should be minimized when using ppTMS to probe intracortical inhibition

GSH23.0-0.7+117, a neutral hydrogen shell in the inner Galaxy

GSH23.0-0.7+117 is a well-defined neutral hydrogen shell discovered in the VLA Galactic Plane Survey (VGPS). Only the blueshifted side of the shell was detected. The expansion velocity and systemic velocity were determined through the systematic behavior of the HI emission with velocity. The center of the shell is at (l,b,v)=(23.05,-0.77,+117 km/s). The angular radius of the shell is 6.8', or 15 pc at a distance of 7.8 kpc. The HI mass divided by the volume of the half-shell implies an average density n_H = 11 +/- 4 cm^{-3} for the medium in which the shell expanded. The estimated age of GSH23.0-0.7+117 is 1 Myr, with an upper limit of 2 Myr. The modest expansion energy of 2 * 10^{48} erg can be provided by the stellar wind of a single O4 to O8 star over the age of the shell. The 3 sigma upper limit to the 1.4 GHz continuum flux density (S_{1.4} < 248 mJy) is used to derive an upper limit to the Lyman continuum luminosity generated inside the shell. This upper limit implies a maximum of one O9 star (O8 to O9.5 taking into account the error in the distance) inside the HI shell, unless most of the incident ionizing flux leaks through the HI shell. To allow this, the shell should be fragmented on scales smaller than the beam (2.3 pc). If the stellar wind bubble is not adiabatic, or the bubble has burst (as suggested by the HI channel maps), agreement between the energy and ionization requirements is even less likely. The limit set by the non-detection in the continuum provides a significant challenge for the interpretation of GSH23.0-0.7+117 as a stellar wind bubble. A similar analysis may be applicable to other Galactic HI shells that have not been detected in the continuum.Comment: 18 pages, 6 figures. Figures 1 and 4 separately in GIF format. Accepted for publication in Astrophysical Journa