Activity of motor cortex neurons during backward locomotion

Beta-frequency sensory stimulation enhances gait rhythmicity through strengthened coupling between striatal networks and stepping movement

Stepping movement is delta (1-4 Hz) rhythmic and depends on sensory inputs. Stepping-related delta-rhythmic neural activity is coupled to beta (10-30 Hz) frequency dynamics that are also prominent in sensorimotor circuits. We explored how beta-frequency sensory stimulation influences stepping and dorsal striatal regulation of stepping. We delivered audiovisual stimulation at 10 or 145 Hz to mice voluntarily locomoting, while recording locomotion, cellular calcium dynamics and local field potentials (LFPs). We found that 10 Hz, but not 145 Hz stimulation prominently entrained striatal LFPs. Even though stimulation at both frequencies promoted locomotion and desynchronized striatal network, only 10 Hz stimulation enhanced the delta rhythmicity of stepping and strengthened the coupling between stepping and striatal LFP delta and beta oscillations. These results demonstrate that higher frequency sensory stimulation can modulate lower frequency striatal neural dynamics and improve stepping rhythmicity, highlighting the translational potential of non-invasive beta-frequency sensory stimulation for improving gait.

Beta-frequency sensory stimulation enhances gait rhythmicity through strengthened coupling between striatal networks and stepping movement

Stepping movement is delta (1-4 Hz) rhythmic and depends on sensory inputs. In addition to delta rhythms, beta (10-30 Hz) frequency dynamics are also prominent in the motor circuits and are coupled to neuronal delta rhythms both at the network and the cellular levels. Since beta rhythms are broadly supported by cortical and subcortical sensorimotor circuits, we explore how beta-frequency sensory stimulation influences delta-rhythmic stepping movement, and dorsal striatal circuit regulation of stepping. We delivered audiovisual stimulation at 10 Hz or 145 Hz to mice voluntarily locomoting, while simultaneously recording stepping movement, striatal cellular calcium dynamics and local field potentials (LFPs). We found that 10 Hz, but not 145 Hz stimulation prominently entrained striatal LFPs. Even though sensory stimulation at both frequencies promoted locomotion and desynchronized striatal network, only 10 Hz stimulation enhanced the delta rhythmicity of stepping movement and strengthened the coupling between stepping and striatal LFP delta and beta oscillations. These results demonstrate that higher frequency sensory stimulation can modulate lower frequency dorsal striatal neural dynamics and improve stepping rhythmicity, highlighting the translational potential of non-invasive beta-frequency sensory stimulation for improving gait.

Differences in backward and forward treadmill locomotion in decerebrated cats

Locomotion in different directions is vital for animal life and requires fine-adjusted neural activity of spinal networks. To compare the levels of recruitability of the locomotor circuitry responsible for forward and backward stepping, several electromyographic and kinematic characteristics of the two locomotor modes were analysed in decerebrated cats. Electrical epidural spinal cord stimulation was used to evoke forward and backward locomotion on a treadmill belt. The functional state of the bilateral spinal networks was tuned by symmetrical and asymmetrical epidural stimulation. A significant deficit in the backward but not forward stepping was observed when laterally shifted epidural stimulation was used but was not observed with central stimulation: only half of the cats were able to perform bilateral stepping, but all the cats performed forward stepping. This difference was in accordance with the features of stepping during central epidural stimulation. Both the recruitability and stability of the EMG signals as well as inter-limb coordination during backward stepping were significantly decreased compared with those during forward stepping. The possible underlying neural mechanisms of the obtained functional differences of backward and forward locomotion (spinal network organisation, commissural communication and supraspinal influence) are discussed.

Activity of Spinal Interneurons during Forward and Backward Locomotion

Higher vertebrates are capable not only of forward but also backward and sideways locomotion. Also, single steps in different directions are generated for postural corrections. While the networks responsible for the control of forward walking (FW) have been studied in considerable detail, the networks controlling steps in other directions are mostly unknown. Here, to characterize the operation of the spinal locomotor network during FW and backward walking (BW), we recorded the activity of individual spinal interneurons from L4 to L6 during both FW and BW evoked by epidural stimulation (ES) of the spinal cord at L5-L6 in decerebrate cats of either sex. Three groups of neurons were revealed. Group 1 (45%) had a similar phase of modulation during both FW and BW. Group 2 (27%) changed the phase of modulation in the locomotor cycle depending on the direction of locomotion. Group 3 neurons were modulated during FW only (Group 3a, 21%) or during BW only (Group 3b, 7%). We suggest that Group 1 neurons belong to the network generating the vertical component of steps (the limb elevation and lowering) because it should operate similarly during locomotion in any direction, while Groups 2 and 3 neurons belong to the networks controlling the direction of stepping. Results of this study provide new insights into the organization of the spinal locomotor circuits, advance our understanding of ES therapeutic effects, and can potentially be used for the development of novel strategies for recuperation of impaired balance control, which requires the generation of corrective steps in different directions.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Animals and humans can perform locomotion in different directions in relation to the body axis (forward, backward, sideways). While the networks that control forward walking have been studied in considerable detail, the networks controlling steps in other directions are unknown. Here, by recording the activity of the same spinal neurons during forward and backward walking, we revealed three groups of neurons forming, respectively, the network operating similarly during stepping in different directions, the network changing its operation with a change in the direction of stepping, and the network operating only during locomotion in a specific direction. These networks presumably control different aspects of the step. The obtained results provide new insights into the organization of the spinal locomotor networks.

Backward Walking Induces Significantly Larger Upper-Mu-Rhythm Suppression Effects Than Forward Walking Does

Studies have compared the differences and similarities between backward walking and forward walking, and demonstrated the potential of backward walking for gait rehabilitation. However, current evidence supporting the benefits of backward walking over forward walking remains inconclusive. Considering the proven association between gait and the cerebral cortex, we used electroencephalograms (EEG) to differentiate the effects of backward walking and forward walking on cortical activities, by comparing the sensorimotor rhythm (8–12 Hz, also called mu rhythm) of EEG signals. A systematic signal procedure was used to eliminate the motion artifacts induced by walking to safeguard EEG signal fidelity. Statistical test results of our experimental data demonstrated that walking motions significantly suppressed mu rhythm. Moreover, backward walking exhibited significantly larger upper mu rhythm (10–12 Hz) suppression effects than forward walking did. This finding implies that backward walking induces more sensorimotor cortex activity than forward walking does, and provides a basis to support the potential benefits of backward walking over forward walking. By monitoring the upper mu rhythm throughout the rehabilitation process, medical experts can adaptively adjust the intensity and duration of each walking training session to improve the efficacy of a walking ability recovery program.

The Spinal Control of Backward Locomotion

Animal locomotion requires changing direction, from forward to backward. Here, we tested the hypothesis that sensorimotor circuits within the spinal cord generate backward locomotion and adjust it to task demands. We collected kinematic and electromyography (EMG) data during forward and backward locomotion at different treadmill speeds before and after complete spinal transection in six adult cats (three males and three females). After spinal transection, five/six cats performed backward locomotion, which required tonic somatosensory input in the form of perineal stimulation. One spinal cat performed forward locomotion but not backward locomotion while two others stepped backward but not forward. Spatiotemporal adjustments to increasing speed were similar in intact and spinal cats during backward locomotion and strategies were similar to forward locomotion, with shorter cycle and stance durations and longer stride lengths. Patterns of muscle activations, including muscle synergies, were similar for forward and backward locomotion in spinal cats. Indeed, we identified five muscle synergies that were similar during forward and backward locomotion. Lastly, spinal cats also stepped backward on a split-belt treadmill, with the left and right hindlimbs stepping at different speeds. Therefore, our results show that spinal sensorimotor circuits generate backward locomotion but require additional excitability compared with forward locomotion. Similar strategies for speed modulation and similar patterns of muscle activations and muscle synergies during forward and backward locomotion are consistent with a shared spinal locomotor network, with sensory feedback from the limbs controlling the direction.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Animal locomotion requires changing direction, including forward, sideways and backward. This paper shows that the center controlling locomotion within the spinal cord can produce a backward pattern when instructed by sensory signals from the limbs. However, the spinal locomotor network requires greater excitability to produce backward locomotion compared with forward locomotion. The paper also shows that the spinal network controlling locomotion in the forward direction also controls locomotion in the backward direction.

Comparison of operation of spinal locomotor networks activated by supraspinal commands and by epidural stimulation of the spinal cord in cats

KEY POINTS

Epidural electrical stimulation (ES) of the spinal cord restores/improves locomotion in patients. ES-evoked locomotor movements differ to some extent from the normal ones. Operation of the locomotor network during ES is unknown. We compared the activity of individual spinal neurons during locomotion initiated by signals from the brainstem and by ES. We demonstrated that the spinal network generating locomotion under each of the two conditions is formed by the same neurons. A part of this network operates similarly under the two conditions, suggesting that it is essential for generation of locomotion under both conditions. Another part of this network operates differently under the two conditions, suggesting that it is responsible for differences in the movement kinematics observed under the two conditions.

ABSTRACT

Locomotion is a vital motor function for both animals and humans. Epidural electrical stimulation (ES) of the spinal cord is used to restore/improve locomotor movements in patients. However, operation of locomotor networks during ES has never been studied. Here we compared the activity of individual spinal neurons recorded in decerebrate cats of either sex during locomotion initiated by supraspinal commands (caused by stimulation of the mesencephalic locomotor region, MLR) and by ES. We found that under both conditions, the same neurons had modulation of their activity related to the locomotor rhythm, suggesting that the network generating locomotion under the two conditions is formed by the same neurons. About 40% of these neurons had stable modulation (i.e. small dispersion of their activity phase in sequential cycles), as well as a similar phase and shape of activity burst in MLR- and ES-evoked locomotor cycles. We suggest that these neurons form a part of the locomotor network that operates similarly under the two conditions, and are critical for generation of locomotion. About 23% of the modulated neurons had stable modulation only during MLR-evoked locomotion. We suggest that these neurons are responsible for some differences in kinematics of MLR- and ES-evoked locomotor movements. Finally, 25% of the modulated neurons had unstable modulation during both MLR- and ES-evoked locomotion. One can assume that these neurons contribute to maintenance of the excitability level of locomotor networks necessary for generation of stepping, or belong to postural networks, activated simultaneously with locomotor networks by both MLR stimulation and ES.

Corticospinal excitability to the biceps and triceps brachii during forward and backward arm cycling is direction- and phase-dependent

The purpose of this study was to evaluate corticospinal excitability to the biceps and triceps brachii during forward (FWD) and backward (BWD) arm cycling. Corticospinal and spinal excitability were assessed using transcranial magnetic stimulation and transmastoid electrical stimulation to elicit motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and cervicomedullary evoked potentials (CMEPs), respectively. MEPs and CMEPs were recorded from the biceps and triceps brachii during FWD and BWD arm cycling at 2 positions, 6 and 12 o’clock. The 6 o’clock position corresponded to mid-elbow flexion and extension during FWD and BWD cycling, respectively, while 12 o’clock corresponded to mid-elbow extension and flexion during FWD and BWD cycling, respectively. During the flexion phase, MEP and CMEP amplitudes of the biceps brachii were higher during FWD cycling. However, during the extension phase, MEP and CMEP amplitudes were higher during BWD cycling. For the triceps brachii, MEP amplitudes were higher during FWD cycling regardless of phase. However, CMEP amplitudes were phase-dependent. During the flexion phase, CMEPs of the triceps brachii were higher during FWD cycling compared with BWD, but during the extension phase CMEPs were higher during BWD cycling compared with FWD. The data suggest that corticospinal and spinal excitability to the biceps brachii is phase- and direction-dependent. In the triceps brachii, spinal, but not corticospinal, excitability is phase-dependent when comparing FWD and BWD cycling.

Novelty This is the first study to assess corticospinal excitability during FWD and BWD locomotor output. Corticospinal excitability during arm cycling depends on the direction, phase, and muscle being assessed.

Nervous mechanisms of locomotion in different directions

Locomotion, that is active propulsive movement of the body in space, is a vital motor function. Intensive studies of the main, for the majority of living beings, form of locomotion, forward locomotion, have revealed essential features of the organization and operation of underlying neural mechanisms. However, animals and humans are capable to locomote not only forward but also in other directions in relation to the body axis, e.g. backward, sideways, etc. Single steps in different directions are also used for postural corrections during locomotion and during standing. Recent studies of mechanisms underlying control of locomotion in different directions have greatly expanded our knowledge about locomotor system and can contribute to improvement of rehabilitation strategies aimed at restoration of locomotion and balance control in patients. This review outlines recent advances in the studies of locomotion in different directions in lower and higher vertebrates, with special attention given to the neuronal locomotor mechanisms.

Distribution of Spinal Neuronal Networks Controlling Forward and Backward Locomotion

Higher vertebrates, including humans, are capable not only of forward (FW) locomotion but also of walking in other directions relative to the body axis [backward (BW), sideways, etc.]. Although the neural mechanisms responsible for controlling FW locomotion have been studied in considerable detail, the mechanisms controlling steps in other directions are mostly unknown. The aim of the present study was to investigate the distribution of spinal neuronal networks controlling FW and BW locomotion. First, we applied electrical epidural stimulation (ES) to different segments of the spinal cord from L2 to S2 to reveal zones triggering FW and BW locomotion in decerebrate cats of either sex. Second, to determine the location of spinal neurons activated during FW and BW locomotion, we used c-Fos immunostaining. We found that the neuronal networks responsible for FW locomotion were distributed broadly in the lumbosacral spinal cord and could be activated by ES of any segment from L3 to S2. By contrast, networks generating BW locomotion were activated by ES of a limited zone from the caudal part of L5 to the caudal part of L7. In the intermediate part of the gray matter within this zone, a significantly higher number of c-Fos-positive interneurons was revealed in BW-stepping cats compared with FW-stepping cats. We suggest that this region of the spinal cord contains the network that determines the BW direction of locomotion.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Sequential and single steps in various directions relative to the body axis [forward (FW), backward (BW), sideways, etc.] are used during locomotion and to correct for perturbations, respectively. The mechanisms controlling step direction are unknown. In the present study, for the first time we compared the distributions of spinal neuronal networks controlling FW and BW locomotion. Using a marker to visualize active neurons, we demonstrated that in the intermediate part of the gray matter within L6 and L7 spinal segments, significantly more neurons were activated during BW locomotion than during FW locomotion. We suggest that the network determining the BW direction of stepping is located in this area.

Backward walking highlights gait asymmetries in children with cerebral palsy

To investigate how early injuries to developing motor regions of the brain affect different forms of gait, we compared the spatiotemporal locomotor patterns during forward (FW) and backward (BW) walking in children with cerebral palsy (CP). Bilateral gait kinematics and EMG activity of 11 pairs of leg muscles were recorded in 14 children with CP (9 diplegic, 5 hemiplegic; 3.0-11.1 yr) and 14 typically developing (TD) children (3.3-11.8 yr). During BW, children with CP showed a significant increase of gait asymmetry in foot trajectory characteristics and limb intersegmental coordination. Furthermore, gait asymmetries, which were not evident during FW in diplegic children, became evident during BW. Factorization of the EMG signals revealed a comparable structure of the motor output during FW and BW in all groups of children, but we found differences in the basic temporal activation patterns. Overall, the results are consistent with the idea that both forms of gait share pattern generation control circuits providing similar (though reversed) kinematic patterns. However, BW requires different muscle activation timings associated with muscle modules, highlighting subtle gait asymmetries in diplegic children, and thus provides a more comprehensive assessment of gait pathology in children with CP. The findings suggest that spatiotemporal asymmetry assessments during BW might reflect an impaired state and/or descending control of the spinal locomotor circuitry and can be used for diagnostic purposes and as complementary markers of gait recovery. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Early injuries to developing motor regions of the brain affect both forward progression and other forms of gait. In particular, backward walking highlights prominent gait asymmetries in children with hemiplegia and diplegia from cerebral palsy and can give a more comprehensive assessment of gait pathology. The observed spatiotemporal asymmetry assessments may reflect both impaired supraspinal control and impaired state of the spinal circuitry.

Neural mechanisms of single corrective steps evoked in the standing rabbit

Single steps in different directions are often used for postural corrections. However, our knowledge about the neural mechanisms underlying their generation is scarce. This study was aimed to characterize the corrective steps generated in response to disturbances of the basic body configuration caused by forward, backward or outward displacement of the hindlimb, as well as to reveal location in the CNS of the corrective step generating mechanisms. Video recording of the motor response to translation of the supporting surface under the hindlimb along with contact forces and activity of back and limb muscles was performed in freely standing intact and in fixed postmammillary rabbits. In intact rabbits, displacement of the hindlimb in any direction caused a lateral trunk movement toward the contralateral hindlimb, and then a corrective step in the direction opposite to the initial displacement. The time difference between onsets of these two events varied considerably. The EMG pattern in the supporting hindlimb was similar for all directions of corrective steps. It caused the increase in the limb stiffness. EMG pattern in the stepping limb differed in steps with different directions. In postmammillary rabbits the corrective stepping movements, as well as EMG patterns in both stepping and standing hindlimbs were similar to those observed in intact rabbits. This study demonstrates that the corrective trunk and limb movements are generated by separate mechanisms activated by sensory signals from the deviated limb. The neuronal networks generating postural corrective steps reside in the brainstem, cerebellum, and spinal cord.

Effect of forward and backward locomotion training on anaerobic performance and anthropometrical composition

[Purpose] Forward walking (FW) and backward walking (BW) on a treadmill is a common tool for lower extremity rehabilitation in the clinical setting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects on anaerobic performance and anthropometrical adaptations during FW and BW on a treadmill. [Subjects and Methods] A convenience sample of thirty healthy male subjects with a mean age of 20.93 ± 2.54 years participated in this study. Subjects were divided into 2 groups, a Forward Walking Group (FWG) (n=15) and a Backward Walking Group (BWG) (n=15), which performed FW and BW on a treadmill at 10° inclination, respectively. The training consisted of three sessions per week for 6 weeks. Study outcomes such as anaerobic performance and anthropometrical body composition were measured at pre- and post-intervention. [Results] Both FW and BW improved anaerobic performance significantly, and the BW group showed better performance than FW. However, changes in anthropometrical body composition were found to be not significant after six weeks of intervention in both the FW and BW groups. [Conclusions] BW training in rehabilitation can be considered more effective than FW at improving anaerobic performance. We also conclude that six weeks of FW and BW training is insufficient for eliciting changes in the body composition.

Flexibility of the axial central pattern generator network for locomotion in the salamander

In tetrapods, limb and axial movements are coordinated during locomotion. It is well established that inter- and intralimb coordination show considerable variations during ongoing locomotion. Much less is known about the flexibility of the axial musculoskeletal system during locomotion and the neural mechanisms involved. Here we examined this issue in the salamander Pleurodeles waltlii, which is capable of locomotion in both aquatic and terrestrial environments. Kinematics of the trunk and electromyograms from the mid-trunk epaxial myotomes were recorded during four locomotor behaviors in freely moving animals. A similar approach was used during rhythmic struggling movements since this would give some insight into the flexibility of the axial motor system. Our results show that each of the forms of locomotion and the struggling behavior is characterized by a distinct combination of mid-trunk motor patterns and cycle durations. Using in vitro electrophysiological recordings in isolated spinal cords, we observed that the spinal networks activated with bath-applied N-methyl-d-aspartate could generate these axial motor patterns. In these isolated spinal cord preparations, the limb motor nerve activities were coordinated with each mid-trunk motor pattern. Furthermore, isolated mid-trunk spinal cords and hemicords could generate the mid-trunk motor patterns. This indicates that each side of the cord comprises a network able to generate coordinated axial motor activity. The roles of descending and sensory inputs in the behavior-related changes in axial motor coordination are discussed.

Patterns of modulation in the activity and connectivity of motor cortex during the repeated generation of movement sequences

It is not clear how the engagement of motor mnemonic processes is expressed in online brain activity. We scanned participants, using fMRI, during the paced performance of a finger-to-thumb opposition sequence (FOS), intensively trained a day earlier (T-FOS), and a similarly constructed, but novel, untrained FOS (U-FOS). Both movement sequences were performed in pairs of blocks separated by a brief rest interval (30 sec). We have recently shown that in the primary motor cortex (M1) motor memory was not expressed in the average signal intensity but rather in the across-block signal modulations, that is, when comparing the first to the second performance block across the brief rest interval. Here, using an M1 seed, we show that for the T-FOS, the M1-striatum functional connectivity decreased across blocks; however, for the U-FOS, connectivity within the M1 and between M1 and striatum increased. In addition, in M1, the pattern of within-block signal change, but not signal variability per se, reliably differentiated the two sequences. Only for the U-FOS and only within the first blocks in each pair, the signal significantly decreased. No such modulation was found within the second corresponding blocks following the brief rest interval in either FOS. We propose that a network including M1 and striatum underlies online motor working memory. This network may promote a transient integrated representation of a new movement sequence and readily retrieves a previously established movement sequence representation. Averaging over single events or blocks may not capture the dynamics of motor representations that occur over multiple timescales.

Sleep promotes branch-specific formation of dendritic spines after learning

How sleep helps learning and memory remains unknown. We report in mouse motor cortex that sleep after motor learning promotes the formation of postsynaptic dendritic spines on a subset of branches of individual layer V pyramidal neurons. New spines are formed on different sets of dendritic branches in response to different learning tasks and are protected from being eliminated when multiple tasks are learned. Neurons activated during learning of a motor task are reactivated during subsequent non-rapid eye movement sleep, and disrupting this neuronal reactivation prevents branch-specific spine formation. These findings indicate that sleep has a key role in promoting learning-dependent synapse formation and maintenance on selected dendritic branches, which contribute to memory storage.

Corticospinal neuroprostheses to restore locomotion after spinal cord injury

In this conceptual review, we highlight our strategy for, and progress in the development of corticospinal neuroprostheses for restoring locomotor functions and promoting neural repair after thoracic spinal cord injury in experimental animal models. We specifically focus on recent developments in recording and stimulating neural interfaces, decoding algorithms, extraction of real-time feedback information, and closed-loop control systems. Each of these complex neurotechnologies plays a significant role for the design of corticospinal neuroprostheses. Even more challenging is the coordinated integration of such multifaceted technologies into effective and practical neuroprosthetic systems to improve movement execution, and augment neural plasticity after injury. In this review we address our progress in rodent animal models to explore the viability of a technology-intensive strategy for recovery and repair of the damaged nervous system. The technical, practical, and regulatory hurdles that lie ahead along the path toward clinical applications are enormous - and their resolution is uncertain at this stage. However, it is imperative that the discoveries and technological developments being made across the field of neuroprosthetics do not stay in the lab, but instead reach clinical fruition at the fastest pace possible.

Spinal and supraspinal control of the direction of stepping during locomotion

Most bipeds and quadrupeds, in addition to forward walking, are also capable of backward and sideward walking. The direction of walking is determined by the direction of stepping movements of individual limbs in relation to the front-to-rear body axis. Our goal was to assess the functional organization of the system controlling the direction of stepping. Experiments were performed on decerebrate cats walking on the treadmill with their hindlimbs, whereas the head and trunk were rigidly fixed. Different directions of the treadmill motion relative to the body axis were used (0, ± 45, ± 90, and 180°). For each direction, we compared locomotion evoked from the brainstem (by stimulation of the mesencephalic locomotor region, MLR) with locomotion evoked by epidural stimulation of the spinal cord (SC). It was found that SC stimulation evoked well coordinated stepping movements at different treadmill directions. The direction of steps was opposite to the treadmill motion, suggesting that this direction was determined by sensory input from the limb during stance. Thus, SC stimulation activates limb controllers, which are able to generate stepping movements in different directions. By contrast, MLR stimulation evoked well coordinated stepping movements only if the treadmill was moving in the front-to-rear direction. One can conclude that supraspinal commands (caused by MLR stimulation) select one of the numerous forms of operation of the spinal limb controllers, namely, the forward walking. The MLR can thus be considered as a command center for forward locomotion, which is the main form of progression in bipeds and quadrupeds.

Similar muscles contribute to horizontal and vertical acceleration of center of mass in forward and backward walking: implications for neural control

Leg kinematics during backward walking (BW) are very similar to the time-reversed kinematics during forward walking (FW). This suggests that the underlying muscle activation pattern could originate from a simple time reversal, as well. Experimental electromyography studies have confirmed that this is the case for some muscles. Furthermore, it has been hypothesized that muscles showing a time reversal should also exhibit a reversal in function [from accelerating the body center of mass (COM) to decelerating]. However, this has not yet been verified in simulation studies. In the present study, forward simulations were used to study the effects of muscles on the acceleration of COM in FW and BW. We found that a reversal in function was indeed present in the muscle control of the horizontal movement of COM (e.g., tibialis anterior and gastrocnemius). In contrast, muscles' antigravity contributions maintained their function for both directions of movement. An important outcome of the present study is therefore that similar muscles can be used to achieve opposite functional demands at the level of control of the COM when walking direction is reversed. However, some muscles showed direction-specific contributions (i.e., dorsiflexors). We concluded that the changes in muscle contributions imply that a simple time reversal would be insufficient to produce BW from FW. We therefore propose that BW utilizes extra elements, presumably supraspinal, in addition to a common spinal drive. These additions are needed for propulsion and require a partial reconfiguration of lower level common networks.

Pyramidal tract neurons receptive to different forelimb joints act differently during locomotion

During locomotion, motor cortical neurons projecting to the pyramidal tract (PTNs) discharge in close relation to strides. How their discharges vary based on the part of the body they influence is not well understood. We addressed this question with regard to joints of the forelimb in the cat. During simple and ladder locomotion, we compared the activity of four groups of PTNs with somatosensory receptive fields involving different forelimb joints: 1) 45 PTNs receptive to movements of shoulder, 2) 30 PTNs receptive to movements of elbow, 3) 40 PTNs receptive to movements of wrist, and 4) 30 nonresponsive PTNs. In the motor cortex, a relationship exists between the location of the source of afferent input and the target for motor output. On the basis of this relationship, we inferred the forelimb joint that a PTN influences from its somatosensory receptive field. We found that different PTNs tended to discharge differently during locomotion. During simple locomotion shoulder-related PTNs were most active during late stance/early swing, and upon transition from simple to ladder locomotion they often increased activity and stride-related modulation while reducing discharge duration. Elbow-related PTNs were most active during late swing/early stance and typically did not change activity, modulation, or discharge duration on the ladder. Wrist-related PTNs were most active during swing and upon transition to the ladder often decreased activity and increased modulation while reducing discharge duration. These data suggest that during locomotion the motor cortex uses distinct mechanisms to control the shoulder, elbow, and wrist.