MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4402949867 · doi:10.1113/jp286808

Changes in intra‐ and interlimb reflexes from forelimb cutaneous afferents after staggered thoracic lateral hemisections during locomotion in cats

2024· article· en· W4402949867 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen Mari, Charly G. Lecomte, Angèle N. Merlet, Johannie Audet, Sirine Yassine, Rasha Al Arab, Jonathan Harnie, Ilya A. Rybak, Boris I. Prilutsky, Alain Frigon

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéNational Institutes of HealthUniversité de MontréalUniversité de Sherbrooke
KeywordsForelimbHindlimbReflexAnatomySpinal cordStimulationCATSMedicineNeuroscienceRadial nerveBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In quadrupeds, such as cats, cutaneous afferents from the forepaw dorsum signal external perturbations and send inputs to spinal circuits to co-ordinate the activity in muscles of all four limbs. How these cutaneous reflex pathways from forelimb afferents are reorganized after an incomplete spinal cord injury is not clear. Using a staggered thoracic lateral hemisections paradigm, we investigated changes in intralimb and interlimb reflex pathways by electrically stimulating the left and right superficial radial nerves in seven adult cats and recording reflex responses in five forelimb and ten hindlimb muscles. After the first (right T5-T6) and second (left T10-T11) hemisections, forelimb-hindlimb co-ordination was altered and weakened. After the second hemisection, cats required balance assistance to perform quadrupedal locomotion. Short-, mid- and long-latency homonymous and crossed reflex responses in forelimb muscles and their phase modulation remained largely unaffected after staggered hemisections. The occurrence of homolateral and diagonal mid- and long-latency responses in hindlimb muscles evoked with left and right superficial radial nerve stimulation was significantly reduced at the first time point after the first hemisection, but partially recovered at the second time point with left superficial radial nerve stimulation. These responses were lost or reduced after the second hemisection. When present, all reflex responses, including homolateral and diagonal, maintained their phase-dependent modulation. Therefore, our results show a considerable loss in cutaneous reflex transmission from cervical to lumbar levels after incomplete spinal cord injury, albeit with preservation of phase modulation, probably affecting functional responses to external perturbations. KEY POINTS: Cutaneous afferent inputs co-ordinate muscle activity in the four limbs during locomotion when the forepaw dorsum contacts an obstacle. Thoracic spinal cord injury disrupts communication between spinal locomotor centres located at cervical and lumbar levels, impairing balance and limb co-ordination. We investigated cutaneous reflexes from forelimb afferents during quadrupedal locomotion by electrically stimulating the superficial radial nerve bilaterally, before and after staggered lateral thoracic hemisections in cats. We showed a loss/reduction of mid- and long-latency homolateral and diagonal reflex responses in hindlimb muscles early after the first hemisection that partially recovered with left superficial radial nerve stimulation, before being reduced after the second hemisection. Targeting cutaneous reflex pathways from forelimb afferents projecting to the four limbs could help develop therapeutic approaches aimed at restoring transmission in ascending and descending spinal pathways.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 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

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physiology→Same topicSpinal Cord Injury Research→French-language works237,207→