MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315798064 · doi:10.1152/jn.2000.83.3.1426

Facilitatory I Wave Interaction in Proximal Arm and Lower Limb Muscle Representations of the Human Motor Cortex

2000· article· en· W2315798064 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Chen, Rami R. Garg

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Western HospitalUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFacilitationTranscranial magnetic stimulationMotor cortexStimulus (psychology)NeuroscienceStimulationHand musclesPsychologyBicepsCorticospinal tractAnatomyMedicineMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the human motor cortex elicits direct and indirect (I) waves in the corticospinal tract. Facilitatory I wave interaction has been demonstrated with a suprathreshold first stimulus (S1) followed by a subthreshold to threshold second stimulus (S2). Intracortical inhibition (ICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF) can be studied by another paired TMS paradigm with a subthreshold conditioning stimulus (CS) followed by a suprathreshold test stimulus. Facilitatory I wave interaction in motor representations other than the hand area and its relationship to ICI and ICF has not been studied. We studied I wave interaction, ICI and ICF in an intrinsic hand muscle (abductor pollicis brevis, APB), in a proximal arm muscle (biceps brachii, BB) and in a lower limb muscle (tibialis anterior, TA) in 11 normal subjects. I wave facilitation was studied by paired TMS at 24 interstimulus intervals (ISIs) from 0.5 to 5.1 ms. For APB and TA, facilitation occurred in three distinct peaks at ISIs of 0.9-1.7, 2. 5-3.5, and 4.1-5.1 ms. For BB, facilitation was significant for the first two peaks. The latencies of the peaks were similar among different muscles, but the magnitude of facilitation was much greater for APB and TA compared with BB. For all three muscles, changing the S2 to transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) resulted in much less facilitation of the first peak. For APB, there was significant I wave facilitation with S2 at 72% motor threshold (MT). The same stimulus used as the CS did not elicit ICF at ISI of 15 ms, suggesting that the threshold for eliciting I wave facilitation is lower than that for ICF. For BB and TA, there was no I wave facilitation with S2 at 90% of APB MT, and the same stimulus used as CS led to ICI. Thus in BB and TA the threshold for eliciting ICI is lower than that for I wave facilitation. We conclude that the circuits that mediate I wave interactions are present in the proximal arm and lower limb representations of the motor cortex. I wave facilitation occurs predominately in the cortex and may be primarily related to the monosynaptic corticomotoneuronal (CM) system. The reduced I wave facilitation for BB compared with APB and TA may be related to less extensive CM projection and involvement of other polysynaptic descending pathways. I wave facilitation, ICI, and ICF appears to be mediated by different neuronal circuits.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.210

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations84
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207