Voluntary co‐contraction of ankle muscles alters motor unit discharge characteristics and reduces estimates of persistent inward currents
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Motoneuronal persistent inward currents (PICs) are facilitated by neuromodulatory inputs but are highly sensitive to local inhibitory circuits. Estimates of PICs are reduced by group Ia reciprocal inhibition, and increased with the diffuse actions of neuromodulators released during remote muscle contraction. However, it remains unknown how motoneurons function in the presence of simultaneous excitatory and inhibitory commands. To probe this topic, we investigated motor unit discharge patterns and estimated PICs during voluntary co-contraction of ankle muscles, which simultaneously demands the contraction of agonist-antagonist pairs. Twenty participants performed triangular ramps of both co-contraction (simultaneous dorsiflexion and plantar flexion) and isometric dorsiflexion to a peak of 30% of their maximum muscle activity from a maximal voluntary contraction. Motor unit spike trains were decomposed from high-density surface EMG activity recorded from tibialis anterior using blind source separation algorithms. Voluntary co-contraction altered motor unit discharge rate characteristics. Discharge rate at recruitment and peak discharge rate were modestly reduced (∼6% change; P < 0.001; d = 0.22) and increased (∼2% change; P = 0.001, d = -0.19), respectively, in the entire dataset but no changes were observed when motor units were tracked across conditions. The largest effects during co-contraction were that estimates of PICs (ΔF) were reduced by ∼20% (4.47 vs. 5.57 pulses per second during isometric dorsiflexion; P < 0.001, d = 0.641). These findings suggest that, during voluntary co-contraction, the inhibitory input from the antagonist muscle overcomes the additional excitatory and neuromodulatory drive that may occur due to the co-contraction of the antagonist muscle, which constrains PIC behaviour. KEY POINTS: Voluntary co-contraction is a unique motor behaviour that concurrently provides excitatory and inhibitory synaptic input to motoneurons. Co-contraction of agonist-antagonist pairs alters agonist motor unit discharge characteristics, consistent with reductions in persistent inward current magnitude.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".