Response triggering by an acoustic stimulus increases with stimulus intensity and is best predicted by startle reflex activation

The benefit of knowledge: postural response modulation by foreknowledge of equilibrium perturbation in an upper limb task

For whole-body sway patterns, a compound motor response following an external stimulus may comprise reflexes, postural adjustments (anticipatory or compensatory), and voluntary muscular activity. Responses to equilibrium destabilization may depend on both motor set and a subject`s expectation of the disturbing stimulus. To disentangle these influences on lower limb responses, we studied a model in which subjects (n = 14) were suspended in the air, without foot support, and performed a fast unilateral wrist extension (WE) in response to a passive knee flexion (KF) delivered by a robot. To characterize the responses, electromyographic activity of rectus femoris and reactive leg torque was obtained bilaterally in a series of trials, with or without the requirement of WE (motor set), and/or beforehand information about the upcoming velocity of KF (subject`s expectation). Some fast-velocity trials resulted in StartReact responses, which were used to subclassify leg responses. When subjects were uninformed about the upcoming KF, large rectus femoris responses concurred with a postural reaction in conditions without motor task, and with both postural reaction and postural adjustment when WE was required. WE in response to a low-volume acoustic signal elicited no postural adjustments. When subjects were informed about KF velocity and had to perform WE, large rectus femoris responses corresponded to anticipatory postural adjustment rather than postural reaction. In conclusion, when subjects are suspended in the air and have to respond with WE, the prepared motor set includes anticipatory postural adjustments if KF velocity is known, and additional postural reactions if KF velocity is unknown.

Startle-triggered responses indicate reticulospinal drive is larger for voluntary shoulder versus finger movements

Recent primate studies have implicated a substantial role of reticulospinal pathways in the production of various voluntary movements. A novel way to assess the relative reticulospinal contributions in humans is through the use of a "StartReact" paradigm where a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) is presented during a simple reaction time (RT) task. The StartReact response is characterized by short-latency triggering of a prepared response, which is attributed to increased reticulospinal drive associated with startle reflex activation. The current study used a StartReact protocol to examine differences in reticulospinal contributions between proximal and distal effectors by examining EMG onset latencies in lateral deltoid and first dorsal interosseous during bilateral shoulder or finger abduction. The magnitude of the StartReact effect, and thus relative reticulospinal drive, was quantified as the difference in RT between startle trials in which startle-reflex related EMG activation in the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) was present (SCM +) versus absent (SCM -). A significantly larger StartReact effect was observed for bilateral shoulder abduction versus bimanual finger abduction and a higher incidence of SCM + trials occurred in the proximal task. Additionally, both startle reflex and response-related EMG measures were larger on SCM + trials for the shoulder versus finger task. These results provide compelling novel evidence for increased reticulospinal activation in bilateral proximal upper-limb movements.

Investigating motor preparation in synchronous hand and foot movements under reactive vs. predictive control

Synchronizing hand and foot movements under reactive versus predictive control results in differential timing structures between the responses. Under reactive control, where the movement is externally triggered, the electromyographic (EMG) responses are synchronized, resulting in the hand displacement preceding the foot. Under predictive control, where the movement is self-paced, the motor commands are organized such that the displacement onset occurs relatively synchronously, requiring the EMG onset of the foot to precede that of the hand. The current study used a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS), which can involuntarily trigger a prepared response, to investigate whether these results are due to differences in a pre-programmed timing structure of the responses. Participants performed synchronous movements of the right heel and right hand under both reactive and predictive modes of control. The reactive condition involved a simple reaction time (RT) task, whereas the predictive condition involved an anticipation-timing task. On selected trials, a SAS (114 dB) was presented 150 ms prior to the imperative stimulus. Results from the SAS trials revealed that while the differential timing structures between the responses was maintained under both reactive and predictive control, the EMG onset asynchrony under predictive control was significantly smaller following the SAS. These results suggest that the timing between the responses, which differs between the two control modes, is pre-programmed; however, under predictive control, the SAS may accelerate the internal timekeeper, resulting in a shortened between-limb delay.

Altered frontoparietal activity in acoustic startle priming tasks during reticulospinal tract facilitation: An fNIRS study

Background

Because it is one of the important pathways for promoting motor recovery after cortical injury, the function of the reticulospinal tract (RST) has received increasing attention in recent years. However, the central regulatory mechanism of RST facilitation and reduction of apparent response time is not well understood.

Objectives

To explore the potential role of RST facilitation in the acoustic startle priming (ASP) paradigm and observe the cortical changes induced by ASP reaching tasks.

Methods

Twenty healthy participants were included in this study. The reaching tasks were performed with their left and right hands. Participants were instructed to get ready after the warning cue and complete the reach as soon as they heard the Go cue. Half of the testing trials were set as control trials with an 80-dB Go cue. The other half of the trials had the Go cue replaced with 114-dB white noise to evoke the StartleReact effect, inducing reticulospinal tract facilitation. The response of the bilateral sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM) and the anterior deltoid was recorded via surface electromyography. Startle trials were labeled as exhibiting a positive or negative StartleReact effect, according to whether the SCM was activated early (30-130 ms after the Go cue) or late, respectively. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy was used to synchronously record the oxyhemoglobin and deoxyhemoglobin fluctuations in bilateral motor-related cortical regions. The β values representing cortical responses were estimated via the statistical parametric mapping technique and included in the final analyses.

Results

Separate analyses of data from movements of the left or right side revealed significant activation of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex during RST facilitation. Moreover, left frontopolar cortex activation was greater in positive startle trials than in control or negative startle trials during left-side movements. Furthermore, decreased activity of the ipsilateral primary motor cortex in positive startle trials during ASP reaching tasks was observed.

Conclusion

The right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and the frontoparietal network to which it belongs may be the regulatory center for the StartleReact effect and RST facilitation. In addition, the ascending reticular activating system may be involved. The decreased activity of the ipsilateral primary motor cortex suggests enhanced inhibition of the non-moving side during the ASP reaching task. These findings provide further insight into the SE and into RST facilitation.

Slowed reaction times in cognitive fatigue are not attributable to declines in motor preparation

Cognitive fatigue (CF) can result from sustained mental effort, is characterized by subjective feelings of exhaustion and cognitive performance deficits, and is associated with slowed simple reaction time (RT). This study determined whether declines in motor preparation underlie this RT effect. Motor preparation level was indexed using simple RT and the StartReact effect, wherein a prepared movement is involuntarily triggered at short latency by a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS). It was predicted that if decreased motor preparation underlies CF-associated RT increases, then an attenuated StartReact effect would be observed following cognitive task completion. Subjective fatigue assessment and a simple RT task were performed before and after a cognitively fatiguing task or non-fatiguing control intervention. On 25% of RT trials, a SAS replaced the go-signal to assess the StartReact effect. CF inducement was verified by significant declines in cognitive performance (p = 0.003), along with increases in subjective CF (p < 0.001) and control RT (p = 0.018) following the cognitive fatigue intervention, but not the control intervention. No significant pre-to-post-test changes in SAS RT were observed, indicating that RT increases resulting from CF are not substantially associated with declines in motor preparation, and instead may be attributable to other stages of processing during a simple RT task.

Response Preparation of a Secondary Reaction Time Task is Influenced by Movement Phase within a Continuous Visuomotor Tracking Task

The simultaneous performance of two motor tasks is challenging. Currently, it is unclear how response preparation of a secondary task is impacted by the performance of a continuous primary task. The purpose of the present experiment was to investigate whether the position of the limb performing the primary cyclical tracking task impacts response preparation of a secondary reaction time task. Participants (n=20) performed a continuous tracking task with their left hand that involved cyclical and targeted wrist flexion and extension. Occasionally, a probe reaction time task requiring isometric wrist extension was performed with the right hand in response to an auditory stimulus (80 dB or 120 dB) that was triggered when the left hand passed through one of ten locations identified within the movement cycle. On separate trials, transcranial magnetic stimulation was applied over the left primary motor cortex and triggered at the same 10 stimulus locations to assess corticospinal excitability associated with the probe reaction time task. Results revealed that probe reaction times were significantly longer and motor evoked potential amplitudes were significantly larger when the left hand was in the middle of a movement cycle compared to an endpoint, suggesting that response preparation of a secondary probe reaction time task was modulated by the phase of movement within the continuous primary task. These results indicate that primary motor task requirements can impact preparation of a secondary task, reinforcing the importance of considering primary task characteristics in dual-task experimental design.