MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3165439725 · doi:10.1113/jp281744

Soleus responses to Achilles tendon stimuli are suppressed by heel and enhanced by metatarsal cutaneous stimuli during standing

2021· article· en· W3165439725 on OpenAlexaff
Robyn L. Mildren, Ryan M. Peters, Mark G. Carpenter, Jean‐Sébastien Blouin, J. Timothy Inglis

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHeelAchilles tendonSoleus muscleAnatomyMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationProprioceptionFoot (prosody)Tendon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS: We examined the influence of cutaneous feedback from the heel and metatarsal regions of the foot sole on the soleus stretch reflex pathway during standing. We found that heel electrical stimuli suppressed and metatarsal stimuli enhanced the soleus vibration response. Follow-up experiments indicated that the interaction between foot sole cutaneous feedback and the soleus vibration response was likely not mediated by presynaptic inhibition and was contingent upon a modulation at the ⍺-motoneuron pool level. The spatially organized interaction between cutaneous feedback from the foot sole and the soleus vibration response provides information about how somatosensory information is combined to appropriately respond to perturbations during standing. ABSTRACT: Cutaneous feedback from the foot sole provides balance-relevant information and has the potential to interact with spinal reflex pathways. In this study, we examined how cutaneous feedback from the foot sole (heel and metatarsals) influenced the soleus response to proprioceptive stimuli during standing. We delivered noisy vibration (10-115 Hz) to the right Achilles tendon while we intermittently applied electrical pulse trains (five 1-ms pulses at 200 Hz, every 0.8-1.0 s) to the skin under either the heel or the metatarsals of the ipsilateral foot sole. We analysed time-dependent (referenced to cutaneous stimuli) coherence and cross-correlations between the vibration acceleration and rectified soleus EMG. Vibration-EMG coherence was observed across a bandwidth of ∼10-80 Hz, and coherence was suppressed by heel but enhanced by metatarsal cutaneous stimuli. Cross-correlations showed soleus EMG was correlated with the vibration (∼40 ms lag) and cross-correlations were also suppressed by heel (from 104-155 ms) but enhanced by metatarsal (from 76-128 ms) stimuli. To examine the neural mechanisms mediating this reflex interaction, we conducted two further experiments to probe potential contributions from (1) presynaptic inhibition, and (2) modulations at the ⍺- and γ-motoneuron pools. Results suggest the cutaneous interactions with the stretch reflex pathway required a modulation at the ⍺-motoneuron pool and were likely not mediated by presynaptic inhibition. These findings demonstrate that foot sole cutaneous information functionally tunes the stretch reflex pathway during the control of upright posture and balance.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physiology→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→