Triceps Surae Short Latency Stretch Reflexes Contribute to Ankle Stiffness Regulation during Human Running

During human running, short latency stretch reflexes (SLRs) are elicited in the triceps surae muscles, but the function of these responses is still a matter of controversy. As the SLR is primarily mediated by Ia afferent nerve fibres, various methods have been used to examine SLR function by selectively blocking the Ia pathway in seated, standing and walking paradigms, but stretch reflex function has not been examined in detail during running. The purpose of this study was to examine triceps surae SLR function at different running speeds using Achilles tendon vibration to modify SLR size. Ten healthy participants ran on an instrumented treadmill at speeds between 7 and 15 km/h under 2 Achilles tendon vibration conditions: no vibration and 90 Hz vibration. Surface EMG from the triceps surae and tibialis anterior muscles, and 3D lower limb kinematics and ground reaction forces were simultaneously collected. In response to vibration, the SLR was depressed in the triceps surae muscles at all speeds. This coincided with short-lasting yielding at the ankle joint at speeds between 7 and 12 km/h, suggesting that the SLR contributes to muscle stiffness regulation by minimising ankle yielding during the early contact phase of running. Furthermore, at the fastest speed of 15 km/h, the SLR was still depressed by vibration in all muscles but yielding was no longer evident. This finding suggests that the SLR has greater functional importance at slow to intermediate running speeds than at faster speeds

Functional Changes in Muscle Afferent Neurones in an Osteoarthritis Model: Implications for Impaired Proprioceptive Performance

Impaired proprioceptive performance is a significant clinical issue for many who suffer osteoarthritis (OA) and is a risk factor for falls and other liabilities. This study was designed to evaluate weight-bearing distribution in a rat model of OA and to determine whether changes also occur in muscle afferent neurones.Intracellular recordings were made in functionally identified dorsal root ganglion neurones in acute electrophysiological experiments on the anaesthetized animal following measurements of hind limb weight bearing in the incapacitance test. OA rats but not naïve control rats stood with less weight on the ipsilateral hind leg (P = 0.02). In the acute electrophysiological experiments that followed weight bearing measurements, action potentials (AP) elicited by electrical stimulation of the dorsal roots differed in OA rats, including longer AP duration (P = 0.006), slower rise time (P = 0.001) and slower maximum rising rate (P = 0.03). Depolarizing intracellular current injection elicited more APs in models than in naïve muscle afferent neurones (P = 0.01) indicating greater excitability. Axonal conduction velocity in model animals was slower (P = 0.04).The present study demonstrates changes in hind limb stance accompanied by changes in the functional properties of muscle afferent neurones in this derangement model of OA. This may provide a possible avenue to explore mechanisms underlying the impaired proprioceptive performance and perhaps other sensory disorders in people with OA

What Is Stochastic Resonance? Definitions, Misconceptions, Debates, and Its Relevance to Biology

Stochastic resonance is said to be observed when increases in levels of unpredictable fluctuations—e.g., random noise—cause an increase in a metric of the quality of signal transmission or detection performance, rather than a decrease. This counterintuitive effect relies on system nonlinearities and on some parameter ranges being “suboptimal”. Stochastic resonance has been observed, quantified, and described in a plethora of physical and biological systems, including neurons. Being a topic of widespread multidisciplinary interest, the definition of stochastic resonance has evolved significantly over the last decade or so, leading to a number of debates, misunderstandings, and controversies. Perhaps the most important debate is whether the brain has evolved to utilize random noise in vivo, as part of the “neural code”. Surprisingly, this debate has been for the most part ignored by neuroscientists, despite much indirect evidence of a positive role for noise in the brain. We explore some of the reasons for this and argue why it would be more surprising if the brain did not exploit randomness provided by noise—via stochastic resonance or otherwise—than if it did. We also challenge neuroscientists and biologists, both computational and experimental, to embrace a very broad definition of stochastic resonance in terms of signal-processing “noise benefits”, and to devise experiments aimed at verifying that random variability can play a functional role in the brain, nervous system, or other areas of biology