MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2102959095 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2008.155986

The plasticity of the adult spinal cord continues to surprise

2008· letter· en· W2102959095 on OpenAlexaff
Richard B. Stein

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2008
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCentral pattern generatorSpinal cord injurySpinal cordTreadmillMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceAnatomyPsychologyPhysical therapyRhythmInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although spinal reflexes are highly modulated during normal behaviour (Zehr & Stein, 1999) and can be modified with training in adult, spinal mammals (Chen et al. 1999), the spinal cord has often been viewed as a relatively fixed and less interesting part of the nervous system. This view was challenged by work showing that quite normal walking patterns could be produced after treadmill training in adult animals with a complete transection at the thoracic level (reviewed by Rossignol et al. 2006). Without training animals did not regain the ability to walk. Thus, the spinal central pattern generator (CPG) for walking, which is normally controlled by supraspinal inputs, can modify itself after spinal cord injury (SCI) and training to function independently of descending inputs. Furthermore, studies from many centres have translated this work to the clinic, although only people with an incomplete SCI show marked benefits from treadmill training (Wernig & Muller, 1992; Barbeau et al. 1999). There is some evidence for a spinal CPG in humans (Calancie et al. 1994; Dimitrijevic et al. 1998), but it may be more dependent on descending inputs and therefore less able to function independently after SCI. The paper by Frigon & Rossignol (2008) in this issue of The Journal of Physiology shows how precisely the normal walking pattern is reproduced, based on careful, labourious, chronic experiments. They recorded with implanted EMG electrodes from cats for 1–2 months before transecting the spinal cord and for a comparable period of time after SCI, while training the animals 3–5 times per week. Both the joint kinematics and the electrical activity of key muscle groups become remarkably similar with training to that found before SCI. How is the missing input from higher centres replaced? To study this Frigon & Rossignol also chronically implanted a cuff containing stimulating electrodes on the tibial nerve near the ankle and evoked reflexes at various times in the step cycle. Interestingly, during the stance phase short-latency reflexes in the calf muscles that were inhibitory in the intact animal became excitatory after SCI and training. The tibial nerve provides the cutaneous innervation of the paw and these receptors will be excited during the stance phase of walking. The modified reflex could provide additional force to support body weight in stance. Changes in cutaneous reflexes are well known in humans after SCI and are thought to contribute to unwanted, spastic responses. For example, innocuously brushing the skin on the leg can lead to a prolonged flexor or extensor response of the whole limb. Whether the changes Frigon & Rossignol observe occur in humans and could contribute to the effects of treadmill training remains to be investigated. Another remarkable, recent finding from Rossignol's lab (Barriere et al. 2008) involves animals in which the spinal cord is initially hemisected and trained for a period of time. Then, following a complete transaction of the cord a couple of segments below the initial lesion, the animals almost immediately show a bilateral, symmetric walking pattern on a treadmill. In some sense, following the unilateral lesion and training the spinal cord ‘learned’ how to produce the walking pattern without descending inputs and surprisingly could ‘instruct’ the other side after it was injured as well. The physiological mechanisms and clinical implications of these new findings are completely unknown.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physiology→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→