Plastic Changes in Lumbar Locomotor Networks after a Partial Spinal Cord Injury in Cats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
After an incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI), we know that plastic reorganization occurs in supraspinal structures with residual descending tracts. However, our knowledge about spinal plasticity is rather limited. Our recent studies point to changes within the spinal cord below the lesion. After a lateral left hemisection (T10), cats recovered stepping with both hindlimbs within 3 weeks. After a complete section (T13) in these cats, bilateral stepping was seen on the next day, a skill usually acquired after several weeks of treadmill training. This indicates that durable plastic changes occurred below the lesion. However, because sensory feedback entrains the stepping rhythm, it is difficult to reveal central pattern generator (CPG) adaptation. Here, we investigated whether lumbar segments of cats with a chronic hemisection were able to generate fictive locomotion-that is, without phasic sensory feedback as monitored by five muscle nerves in each hindlimb. With a chronic left hemisection, the number of muscle nerves displaying locomotor bursts was larger on the left than on the right. In addition, transmission of cutaneous reflexes was relatively facilitated on the left. Later during the acute experiment, a complete spinalization (T13) was performed and clonidine was injected to induce rhythmic activities. There were still more muscle nerves displaying locomotor bursts on the left. The results demonstrate that spinal networks were indeed modified after a hemisection with a clear asymmetry between left and right in the capacity to generate locomotion. Plastic changes in CPG and reflex transmission below the lesion are thus involved in the stepping recovery after an incomplete SCI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".