Changes in Spinal Reflex Excitability Associated With Motor Sequence Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is ample evidence that motor sequence learning is mediated by changes in brain activity. Yet the question of whether this form of learning elicits changes detectable at the spinal cord level has not been addressed. To date, studies in humans have revealed that spinal reflex activity may be altered during the acquisition of various motor skills, but a link between motor sequence learning and changes in spinal excitability has not been demonstrated. To address this issue, we studied the modulation of H-reflex amplitude evoked in the flexor carpi radialis muscle of 14 healthy individuals between blocks of movements that involved the implicit acquisition of a sequence versus other movements that did not require learning. Each participant performed the task in three conditions: "sequence"-externally triggered, repeating and sequential movements, "random"-similar movements, but performed in an arbitrary order, and "simple"- involving alternating movements in a left-right or up-down direction only. When controlling for background muscular activity, H-reflex amplitude was significantly more reduced in the sequence (43.8 +/- 1.47%. mean +/- SE) compared with the random (38.2 +/- 1.60%) and simple (31.5 +/- 1.82%) conditions, while the M-response was not different across conditions. Furthermore, H-reflex changes were observed from the beginning of the learning process up to when subjects reached asymptotic performance on the motor task. Changes also persisted for >60 s after motor activity ceased. Such findings suggest that the excitability in some spinal reflex circuits is altered during the implicit learning process of a new motor sequence.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".