Regionally distinct cutaneous afferent populations contribute to reflex modulation evoked by stimulation of the tibial nerve during walking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During walking, cutaneous reflexes in ankle flexor muscle [tibialis anterior (TA)] evoked by tibial nerve (TIB) stimulation are predominantly facilitatory at early swing phase but reverse to suppression at late swing phase. Although the TIB innervates a large portion of the skin of the foot sole, the extent to which specific foot-sole regions contribute to the reflex reversals during walking remains unclear. Therefore, we investigated regional cutaneous contributions from discrete portions of the foot sole on reflex reversal in TA following TIB stimulation during walking. Summation effects on reflex amplitudes, when applying combined stimulation from foot-sole regions with TIB, were examined. Middle latency responses (MLRs; 70-120 ms) after TIB stimulation were strongly facilitated during the late stance to mid-swing phases and reversed to suppression just before heel (HL) strike. Both forefoot-medial (f-M) and forefoot-lateral stimulation in the foot sole induced facilitation during stance-to-swing transition phases, but HL stimulation evoked suppression during the late stance to the end of swing phases. At the stance-to-swing transition, a summation of MLR amplitude occurred only for combined f-M&TIB stimulation. However, the same was not true for the combined HL&TIB stimulation. At the swing-to-stance transition, there was a suppressive reflex summation only for HL&TIB stimulation. In contrast, this summation was not observed for the f-M&TIB stimulation. Our results suggest that reflex reversals evoked by TIB stimulation arise from distinct reflex pathways to TA produced by separate afferent populations innervating specific regions of the foot sole.
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".