Postactivation depression and recovery of reflex transmission during repetitive electrical stimulation of the human tibial nerve
Bibliographic record
Abstract
H-reflexes are progressively depressed, relative to the first response, at stimulation frequencies above 0.1 Hz (postactivation depression; PAD). Presently, we investigated whether H-reflexes "recover" from this depression throughout 10-s trains of stimulation delivered at physiologically relevant frequencies (5-20 Hz) during functionally relevant tasks (sitting and standing) and contraction amplitudes [relaxed to 20% maximum voluntary contraction (MVC)]. When participants held a 10% MVC, reflex amplitudes did not change during 5-Hz stimulation. During stimulation at 10 Hz, reflexes were initially depressed by 43% but recovered completely by the end of the stimulation period. During 20-Hz stimulation, reflexes were depressed to 10% and recovered to 36% of the first response, respectively. This "postactivation depression and recovery" (PAD&R) of reflex amplitude was not different between sitting and standing. In contrast, PAD&R were strongly influenced by contraction amplitude. Reflexes were depressed to 10% of the first response during the relaxed condition (10-Hz stimulation) and showed no depression during a 20% MVC contraction. A partial recovery of reflex amplitude occurred when participants were relaxed and during contractions of 1-5% MVC. Surprisingly, reflexes could recover completely by the third pulse within a stimulation train when participants held a contraction between 5 and 10% MVC during stimulation at 10 Hz, a finding that challenges classical ideas regarding PAD mechanisms. Our results support the idea that there is an ongoing interplay between depression and facilitation when motoneurons receive trains of afferent input. This interplay depends strongly on the frequency of the afferent input and the magnitude of the background contraction but is relatively insensitive to changes in task.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".