Generic inhibition of the selected movement and constrained inhibition of nonselected movements during response preparation

Corticospinal excitability reductions during action preparation and action stopping in humans: Different sides of the same inhibitory coin?

Motor functions and cognitive processes are closely associated with each other. In humans, this linkage is reflected in motor system state changes both when an action must be prepared and stopped. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation showed that both action preparation and action stopping are accompanied by a reduction of corticospinal excitability, referred to as preparatory and response inhibition, respectively. While previous efforts have been made to describe both phenomena extensively, an updated and comprehensive comparison of the two phenomena is lacking. To ameliorate such deficit, this review focuses on the role and interpretation of single-coil (single-pulse and paired-pulse) and dual-coil TMS outcome measures during action preparation and action stopping in humans. To that effect, it aims to identify commonalities and differences, detailing how TMS-based outcome measures are affected by states, traits, and psychopathologies in both processes. Eventually, findings will be compared, and open questions will be addressed to aid future research.

Corticospinal excitability during motor preparation of upper extremity reaches reflects flexor muscle synergies: A novel principal component-based motor evoked potential analyses

Background

Previous research has shown that noninvasive brain stimulation can be used to study how the central nervous system (CNS) prepares the execution of a motor task. However, these previous studies have been limited to a single muscle or single degree of freedom movements (e.g., wrist flexion). It is currently unclear if the findings of these studies generalize to multi-joint movements involving multiple muscles, which may be influenced by kinematic redundancy and muscle synergies.

Objective

The objective of this study was to characterize corticospinal excitability during motor preparation in the cortex prior to functional upper extremity reaches.

Methods

20 participants without neurological impairments volunteered for this study. During the experiment, the participants reached for a cup in response to a visual "Go Cue". Prior to movement onset, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to stimulate the motor cortex and measured the changes in motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in several upper extremity muscles. We varied each participant's initial arm posture and used a novel synergy-based MEP analysis to examine the effect of muscle coordination on MEPs. Additionally, we varied the timing of the stimulation between the Go Cue and movement onset to examine the time course of motor preparation.

Results

We found that synergies with strong proximal muscle (shoulder and elbow) components emerged as the stimulation was delivered closer to movement onset, regardless of arm posture, but MEPs in the distal (wrist and finger) muscles were not facilitated. We also found that synergies varied with arm posture in a manner that reflected the muscle coordination of the reach.

Conclusions

We believe that these findings provide useful insight into the way the CNS plans motor skills.

Muscle Coordination Matters: Insights into Motor Planning using Corticospinal Responses during Functional Reaching

The central nervous system (CNS) moves the human body by forming a plan in the primary motor cortex and then executing this plan by activating the relevant muscles. It is possible to study motor planning by using noninvasive brain stimulation techniques to stimulate the motor cortex prior to a movement and examine the evoked responses. Studying the motor planning process can reveal useful information about the CNS, but previous studies have generally been limited to single degree of freedom movements ( e.g., wrist flexion). It is currently unclear if findings in these studies generalize to multi-joint movements, which may be influenced by kinematic redundancy and muscle synergies. Here, our objective was to characterize motor planning in the cortex prior to a functional reach involving the upper extremity. We asked participants to reach for a cup placed in front of them when presented with a visual "Go Cue". Following the go cue, but prior to movement onset, we used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to stimulate the motor cortex and measured the changes in the magnitudes of evoked responses in several upper extremity muscles (MEPs). We varied each participant's initial arm posture to examine the effect of muscle coordination on MEPs. Additionally, we varied the timing of the stimulation between the go cue and movement onset to examine the time course of changes in the MEPs. We found that the MEPs in all proximal (shoulder and elbow) muscles increased as the stimulation was delivered closer to movement onset, regardless of arm posture, but MEPs in the distal (wrist and finger) muscles were not facilitated or even inhibited. We also found that facilitation varied with arm posture in a manner that reflected the coordination of the subsequent reach. We believe that these findings provide useful insight into the way the CNS plans motor skills.

Action Selection and Motor Decision Making: Insights from Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

In everyday life, goal-oriented motor behaviour relies on the estimation of the rewards/costs associated with alternative actions and on the appropriate selection of movements. Motor decision making is defined as the process by which a motor plan is chosen among a set of competing actions based on the expected value. In the present literature review we discuss evidence from transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies of motor control. We focus primarily on studies of action selection for instructed movements and motor decision making. In the first section, we delve into the usefulness of various TMS paradigms to characterise the contribution of motor areas and distributed brain networks to cued action selection. Then, we address the influence of motivational information (e.g., reward and biomechanical cost) in guiding action choices based on TMS findings. Finally, we conclude that TMS represents a powerful tool for elucidating the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying action choices in humans.

The Role of Conjunctive Representations in Stopping Actions

Action selection appears to rely on conjunctive representations that nonlinearly integrate task-relevant features. Here, we tested a corollary of this hypothesis: that such representations are also intricately involved during attempts to stop an action-a key aspect of action regulation. We tracked both conjunctive representations and those of constituent rule, stimulus, or response features through trial-by-trial representational similarity analysis of the electroencephalogram signal in a combined rule-selection and stop-signal paradigm. Across two experiments with student participants (N = 57), we found (a) that the strength of decoded conjunctive representations prior to the stop signal uniquely predicted trial-by-trial stopping success (Experiment 1) and (b) that these representations were selectively suppressed following the onset of the stop signal (Experiments 1 and 2). We conclude that conjunctive representations are key to successful action execution and therefore need to be suppressed when an intended action is no longer appropriate.

Exploring cortico-cortical interactions during action preparation by means of dual-coil transcranial magnetic stimulation: A systematic review

Action preparation is characterized by a set of complex and distributed processes that occur in multiple brain areas. Interestingly, dual-coil transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a relevant technique to probe effective connectivity between cortical areas, with a high temporal resolution. In the current systematic review, we aimed at providing a detailed picture of the cortico-cortical interactions underlying action preparation focusing on dual-coil TMS studies. We considered four theoretical processes (impulse control, action selection, movement initiation and action reprogramming) and one task modulator (movement complexity). The main findings highlight 1) the interplay between primary motor cortex (M1) and premotor, prefrontal and parietal cortices during action preparation, 2) the varying (facilitatory or inhibitory) cortico-cortical influence depending on the theoretical processes and the TMS timing, and 3) the key role of the supplementary motor area-M1 interactions that shape the preparation of simple and complex movements. These findings are of particular interest for clinical perspectives, with a need to better characterize functional connectivity deficiency in clinical population with altered action preparation.

Reward facilitates response conflict resolution via global motor inhibition: Electromyography evidence

It is crucial for humans to coordinate between behavioural tendencies that can lead to reward but are in conflict with each other. This response conflict can be measured in a reward-modulated Simon task, in which a discriminative response to the identity of a lateral target is required and the target is associated with either high- or low-reward. Critically, the lateral target is presented either congruent or incongruent with the location of the responding hand. It has been shown that relative to the low-reward target, the high-reward target induced a larger response conflict when the target was incongruent with the position of the task-required, reward-obtaining hand. Here we investigated how this response conflict is resolved by acquiring 24 healthy participants' electromyography (EMG) signals from both the task-required responding hand (i.e., goal-directed effector) and the alternative hand (i.e., inappropriate effector). During the coping with the response conflict, motor inhibition (indexed by reduction in EMG signals between conditions) was observed not only at the inappropriate effector but also at the goal-directed effector. Individuals who showed stronger inhibition on the inappropriate effector suffered less from the inhibition on the goal-directed effector, and had more efficient implementation of the reward-obtaining response. Our findings suggest a global motor inhibition that may function to increase the signal-noise ratio in the motor system so as to implement reward-guided behavior.

Preparing to React: A Behavioral Study on the Interplay between Proactive and Reactive Action Inhibition

Motor preparation, based on one's goals and expectations, allows for prompt reactions to stimulations from the environment. Proactive and reactive inhibitory mechanisms modulate this preparation and interact to allow a flexible control of responses. In this study, we investigate these two control mechanisms with an ad hoc cued Go/NoGo Simon paradigm in a within-subjects design, and by measuring subliminal motor activities through electromyographic recordings. Go cues instructed participants to prepare a response and wait for target onset to execute it (Go target) or inhibit it (NoGo target). Proactive inhibition keeps the prepared response in check, hence preventing false alarms. Preparing the cue-coherent effector in advance speeded up responses, even when it turned out to be the incorrect effector and reactive inhibition was needed to perform the action with the contralateral one. These results suggest that informative cues allow for the investigation of the interaction between proactive and reactive action inhibition. Partial errors' analysis suggests that their appearance in compatible conflict-free trials depends on cue type and prior preparatory motor activity. Motor preparation plays a key role in determining whether proactive inhibition is needed to flexibly control behavior, and it should be considered when investigating proactive/reactive inhibition.

Prefronto-Striatal Structural Connectivity Mediates Adult Age Differences in Action Selection

In complex everyday environments, action selection is critical for optimal goal-directed behavior. This refers to the process of choosing a proper action from the range of possible alternatives. The neural mechanisms underlying action selection and how these are affected by normal aging remain to be elucidated. In the present cross-sectional study, we studied processes of effector selection during a multilimb reaction time task in a lifespan sample of healthy human adults (N = 89; 20-75 years; 48 males, 41 females). Participants were instructed to react as quickly and accurately as possible to visually cued stimuli representing single-limb or combined upper and/or lower limb motions. Diffusion MRI was used to study structural connectivity between prefrontal and striatal regions as critical nodes for action selection. Behavioral findings revealed that increasing age was associated with slowing of action selection performance. At the neural level, aging had a negative impact on prefronto-striatal connectivity. Importantly, mediation analyses revealed that the negative association between action selection performance and age was mediated by prefronto-striatal connectivity, specifically the connections between left rostral medial frontal gyrus and left nucleus accumbens as well as right frontal pole and left caudate. These results highlight the potential role of prefronto-striatal white matter decline in poorer action selection performance of older adults.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT As a result of enhanced life expectancy, researchers have devoted increasing attention to the study of age-related alterations in cognitive and motor functions. Here we study associations between brain structure and behavior to reveal the impact of central neural white matter changes as a function of normal aging on action selection performance. We demonstrate the critical role of a reduction in prefronto-striatal structural connectivity in accounting for action selection performance deficits in healthy older adults. Preserving this cortico-subcortical pathway may be critical for behavioral flexibility and functional independence in older age.

Expected TMS excites the motor system less effectively than unexpected stimulation

The brain's response to sensory input is modulated by prediction. For example, sounds that are produced by one's own actions, or those that are strongly predicted by environmental cues, elicit an attenuated N1 component in the auditory evoked potential. It has been suggested that this form of sensory attenuation to stimulation produced by one's own actions is the reason we are unable to tickle ourselves. Here we examined whether the neural response to direct stimulation of the brain is attenuated by prediction in a similar manner. Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) applied over primary motor cortex can be used to gauge the excitability of the motor system. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs), elicited by TMS and measured in peripheral muscles, are larger when actions are being prepared and smaller when actions are voluntarily suppressed. We tested whether the amplitude of MEPs was attenuated under circumstances where the TMS pulse can be reliably predicted, even though control of the relevant motor effector was never required. Self-initiation of the TMS pulse and reliable cuing of the TMS pulse both produced attenuated MEP amplitudes, compared to those generated programmatically in an unpredictable manner. These results suggest that predictive coding may be governed by domain-general mechanisms responsible for all forms predictive learning. The findings also have important methodological implications for designing TMS experiments that control for the predictability of TMS pulses.

The Neural Specificity of Movement Preparation During Actual and Imagined Movements

Current theories consider motor imagery, the mental representation of action, to have considerable functional overlap with the processes involved in actual movement preparation and execution. To test the neural specificity of motor imagery, we conducted a series of 3 experiments using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). We compared changes in corticospinal excitability as people prepared and implemented actual or imagined movements, using a delayed response task in which a cue indicated the forthcoming response. TMS pulses, used to elicit motor-evoked responses in the first dorsal interosseous muscle of the right hand, were applied before and after an imperative signal, allowing us to probe the state of excitability during movement preparation and implementation. Similar to previous work, excitability increased in the agonist muscle during the implementation of an actual or imagined movement. Interestingly, preparing an imagined movement engaged similar inhibitory processes as that observed during actual movement, although the degree of inhibition was less selective in the imagery conditions. These changes in corticospinal excitability were specific to actual/imagined movement preparation, as no modulation was observed when preparing and generating images of cued visual objects. Taken together, inhibition is a signature of how actions are prepared, whether they are imagined or actually executed.

Motor cortex disruption delays motor processes but not deliberation about action choices

Decisions about actions typically involve a period of deliberation that ends with the commitment to a choice and the motor processes overtly expressing that choice. Previous studies have shown that neural activity in sensorimotor areas, including the primary motor cortex (M1), correlates with deliberation features during action selection. However, the causal contribution of these areas to the decision process remains unclear. Here, we investigated whether M1 determines choice commitment or whether it simply reflects decision signals coming from upstream structures and instead mainly contributes to the motor processes that follow commitment. To do so, we tested the impact of a disruption of M1 activity, induced by continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS), on the behavior of human subjects in 1) a simple reaction time (SRT) task allowing us to estimate the duration of the motor processes and 2) a modified version of the tokens task (Cisek P, Puskas GA, El-Murr S. J Neurosci 29: 11560-11571, 2009), which allowed us to estimate subjects' time of commitment as well as accuracy criterion. The efficiency of cTBS was attested by a reduction in motor evoked potential amplitudes following M1 disruption compared with those following a sham stimulation. Furthermore, M1 cTBS lengthened SRTs, indicating that motor processes were perturbed by the intervention. Importantly, all of the behavioral results in the tokens task were similar following M1 disruption and sham stimulation, suggesting that the contribution of M1 to the deliberation process is potentially negligible. Taken together, these findings favor the view that M1 contribution is downstream of the decision process.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Decisions between actions are ubiquitous in the animal realm. Deliberation during action choices entails changes in the activity of the sensorimotor areas controlling those actions, but the causal role of these areas is still often debated. With the use of continuous theta burst stimulation, we show that disrupting the primary motor cortex (M1) delays the motor processes that follow instructed commitment but does not alter volitional deliberation, suggesting that M1 contribution may be downstream of the decision process.

Tracking Keystroke Sequences at the Cortical Level Reveals the Dynamics of Serial Order Production

Response selection is often studied by examining single responses, although most actions are performed within an overarching sequence. Understanding processes that order and execute items in a sequence is thus essential to give a complete picture of response selection. In this study, we investigate response selection by comparing single responses and response sequences as well as unimanual and bimanual sequences. We recorded EEG while participants were typing one- or two-keystroke sequences. Irrespective of stimulus modality (visual or auditory), response-locked analysis revealed distinct contralateral and ipsilateral components previously associated with activation and inhibition of alternative responses. Unimanual sequences exhibited a similar activation/inhibition pattern as single responses, but with the activation component of the pattern expressed more strongly, reflecting the fact that the hand will be used for two strokes. In contrast, bimanual sequences were associated with successive activation of each of the corresponding motor cortices controlling each keystroke and no traceable inhibitory component. In short, the activation component of the two-keystroke sequence EEG pattern can be understood from the addition of activation components of single-stroke sequences; the inhibition of the hand not being used is only evidenced when that hand is not planned for the next stroke.

Preparatory inhibition: Impact of choice in reaction time tasks

By applying transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over primary motor cortex (M1) to elicit motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in muscles of the contralateral hand during reaction time (RT) tasks, many studies have reported a strong global suppression of motor excitability during action preparation, a phenomenon called preparatory inhibition. Several hypotheses have been put forward regarding the role of this broad suppression, with the predominant view that it reflects inhibitory processes assisting action selection. However, this assumption is still a matter of debate. Here, we aimed at directly addressing this idea by comparing MEPs in a task that required subjects to select a finger response within a set of predefined options (choice RT task: left or right index finger abduction) or when subjects simply had to provide the same finger response on every trial, in the absence of choice (simple RT task). Moreover, we minimized any effect that could be associated with other forms of inhibition. In both versions of the task, TMS was applied on both M1 (double-coil protocol) at several time points between the go signal and the left or right index finger response, eliciting MEPs bilaterally in the prime mover (index finger agonist) and in an irrelevant muscle (pinky agonist). Overall, MEP suppression was moderate in this study compared to past research; it was only found for the irrelevant muscle. As such, MEPs in the index agonist were facilitated when elicited in a responding hand (e.g. left MEPs preceding left responses) and remained mostly unchanged in a non-responding hand (e.g. left MEPs preceding right responses). In contrast, MEPs were almost always suppressed in the pinky muscle when elicited in the non-responding hand. This finding contrasts with previous studies where preparatory inhibition usually concerns both relevant and irrelevant muscles. Yet importantly, the suppression was more consistent in the choice than in the simple RT task, supporting the view that preparatory inhibition may assist action selection.

Planning face, hand, and leg movements: anatomical constraints on preparatory inhibition

Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs), elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the motor cortex, are reduced during the preparatory period in delayed response tasks. In this study we examined how MEP suppression varies as a function of the anatomical organization of the motor cortex. MEPs were recorded from a left index muscle while participants prepared a hand or leg movement in experiment 1 or prepared an eye or mouth movement in experiment 2. In this manner, we assessed if the level of MEP suppression in a hand muscle varied as a function of the anatomical distance between the agonist for the forthcoming movement and the muscle targeted by TMS. MEP suppression was attenuated when the cued effector was anatomically distant from the hand (e.g., leg or facial movement compared with finger movement). A similar effect was observed in experiment 3 in which MEPs were recorded from a muscle in the leg and the forthcoming movement involved the upper limb or face. These results demonstrate an important constraint on preparatory inhibition: it is sufficiently broad to be manifest in a muscle that is not involved in the task, but it is not global, showing a marked attenuation when the agonist muscle belongs to a different segment of the body. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Using transcranial magnetic stimulation, we examined changes in corticospinal excitability as people prepared to move. Consistent with previous work, we observed a reduction in excitability during the preparatory period, an effect observed in both task-relevant and task-irrelevant muscles. However, this preparatory inhibition is anatomically constrained, attenuated in muscles belonging to a different body segment than the agonist of the forthcoming movement.

Investigating the effect of anticipating a startling acoustic stimulus on preparatory inhibition

OBJECTIVES

Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) show a profound suppression when elicited during the instructed-delay of reaction time (RT) tasks. One predominant hypothesis is that this phenomenon, called "preparatory inhibition", reflects the operation of processes that suppress motor activity to withhold prepared (but delayed) responses, a form of impulse control. In addition, a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) - a loud and narrow sound - can trigger the release of prepared responses in RT tasks. We predicted that, if such premature release is clearly forbidden, then anticipating a SAS during delay periods may be associated with increased preparatory inhibition for greater impulse control.

METHODS

Subjects performed a behavioural (n=16) and TMS (n=11) experiment. Both used a choice RT task that required subjects to choose a response based on a preparatory cue but to only release it after an imperative signal. SAS and TMS pulses were elicited at the end of the delay period and subjects were asked to do their best to only release their response after the imperative signal, even in the presence of SAS. SAS could be either rare or frequent, in separate blocks.

RESULTS

Consistent with the literature, SAS shortened RTs, especially when they occurred frequently. Moreover, MEPs were suppressed when subjects delayed prepared responses but this preparatory inhibition did not depend on whether SAS were frequent or rare.

DISCUSSION

The stronger RT shortening with frequent rather than rare SAS may be due to increased attention and/or reduced reactive inhibition to SAS, leaving preparatory inhibition unaffected.

Using a Double-Coil TMS Protocol to Assess Preparatory Inhibition Bilaterally

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) applied over the primary motor cortex (M1), elicits motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in contralateral limb muscles which are valuable indicators of corticospinal excitability (CSE) at the time of stimulation. So far, most studies have used single-coil TMS over one M1, yielding MEPs in muscles of a single limb-usually the hand. However, tracking CSE in the two hands simultaneously would be useful in many contexts. We recently showed that, in the resting state, double-coil stimulation of the two M1 with a 1 ms inter-pulse interval (double-coil_{1 ms} TMS) elicits MEPs in both hands that are comparable to MEPs obtained using single-coil TMS. To further evaluate this new technique, we considered the MEPs elicited by double-coil_{1 ms} TMS in an instructed-delay choice reaction time task where a prepared response has to be withheld until an imperative signal is displayed. Single-coil TMS studies have repetitively shown that in this type of task, the motor system is transiently inhibited during the delay period, as evident from the broad suppression of MEP amplitudes. Here, we aimed at investigating whether a comparable inhibitory effect can be observed with MEPs elicited using double-coil_{1 ms} TMS. To do so, we compared the amplitude as well as the coefficient of variation (CV) of MEPs produced by double-coil_{1 ms} or single-coil TMS during action preparation. We observed that MEPs were suppressed (smaller amplitude) and often less variable (smaller CV) during the delay period compared to baseline. Importantly, these effects were equivalent whether single-coil or double-coil_{1 ms} TMS was used. This suggests that double-coil_{1 ms} TMS is a reliable tool to assess CSE, not only when subjects are at rest, but also when they are involved in a task, opening new research horizons for scientists interested in the corticospinal correlates of human behavior.

Response inhibition activates distinct motor cortical inhibitory processes

We routinely cancel preplanned movements that are no longer required. If stopping is forewarned, proactive processes are engaged to selectively decrease motor cortex excitability. However, without advance information there is a nonselective reduction in motor cortical excitability. In this study we examined modulation of human primary motor cortex inhibitory networks during response inhibition tasks with informative and uninformative cues using paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation. Long- (LICI) and short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI), indicative of GABAB- and GABAA-receptor mediated inhibition, respectively, were examined from motor evoked potentials obtained in task-relevant and task-irrelevant hand muscles when response inhibition was preceded by informative and uninformative cues. When the participants (10 men and 8 women) were cued to stop only a subcomponent of the bimanual response, the remaining response was delayed, and the extent of delay was greatest in the more reactive context, when cues were uninformative. For LICI, inhibition was reduced in both muscles during all types of response inhibition trials compared with the pre-task resting baseline. When cues were uninformative and left-hand responses were suddenly canceled, task-relevant LICI positively correlated with response times of the responding right hand. In trials where left-hand responding was highly probable or known (informative cues), task-relevant SICI was reduced compared with that when cued to rest, revealing a motor set indicative of responding. These novel findings indicate that the GABAB-receptor-mediated pathway may set a default inhibitory tone according to task context, whereas the GABAA-receptor-mediated pathways are recruited proactively with response certainty.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY We examined how informative and uninformative cues that trigger both proactive and reactive processes modulate GABAergic inhibitory networks within human primary motor cortex. We show that GABAB inhibition was released during the task regardless of cue type, whereas GABAA inhibition was reduced when responding was highly probable or known compared with rest. GABAB-receptor-mediated inhibition may set a default inhibitory tone, whereas GABAA circuits may be modulated proactively according to response certainty.

Motor-evoked potentials reveal functional differences between dominant and non-dominant motor cortices during response preparation

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the motor cortex produces motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in contralateral muscles. The amplitude of these MEPs can be used to measure the excitability of the corticospinal tract during motor planning. In two experiments, we investigated learning-related changes in corticospinal excitability as subjects prepared to respond in a choice reaction-time task. Subjects responded with their left or right hand to a left or right arrow, and on some trials the arrow was immediately preceded by a warning cue that signaled which response would be required. TMS was applied to the motor cortex during the warning cues, and MEPs were measured in the dominant or non-dominant hand. We observed changes in corticospinal excitability during the warning cue, but these depended on which hand the subject was preparing to respond with, and how experienced they were with the task. When subjects prepared to respond with the non-dominant hand, excitability increased in the non-dominant hemisphere and decreased in the dominant hemisphere. These changes became stronger with task experience, and were accompanied by behavioral improvements in the task. When subjects were preparing a dominant-hand response, the non-dominant hemisphere was suppressed, but this effect disappeared as subjects gained experience with the task. There were no changes in the dominant hemisphere before dominant-hand responses. We conclude that preparing to respond with the non-dominant hand involves temporarily reversing an asymmetry in excitability that normally favors the dominant hemisphere, and that this pattern is enhanced by learning during the task.

Corticospinal gating during action preparation and movement in the primate motor cortex

During everyday actions there is a need to be able to withhold movements until the most appropriate time. This motor inhibition is likely to rely on multiple cortical and subcortical areas, but the primary motor cortex (M1) is a critical component of this process. However, the mechanisms behind this inhibition are unclear, particularly the role of the corticospinal system, which is most often associated with driving muscles and movement. To address this, recordings were made from identified corticospinal (PTN, n = 94) and corticomotoneuronal (CM, n = 16) cells from M1 during an instructed delay reach-to-grasp task. The task involved the animals withholding action for ~2 s until a GO cue, after which they were allowed to reach and perform the task for a food reward. Analysis of the firing of cells in M1 during the delay period revealed that, as a population, non-CM PTNs showed significant suppression in their activity during the cue and instructed delay periods, while CM cells instead showed a facilitation during the preparatory delay. Analysis of cell activity during movement also revealed that a substantial minority of PTNs (27%) showed suppressed activity during movement, a response pattern more suited to cells involved in withholding rather than driving movement. These results demonstrate the potential contributions of the M1 corticospinal system to withholding of actions and highlight that suppression of activity in M1 during movement preparation is not evenly distributed across different neural populations.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY Recordings were made from identified corticospinal (PTN) and corticomotoneuronal (CM) cells during an instructed delay task. Activity of PTNs as a population was suppressed during the delay, in contrast to CM cells, which were facilitated. A minority of PTNs showed a rate profile that might be expected from inhibitory cells and could suggest that they play an active role in action suppression, most likely through downstream inhibitory circuits.

Towards assessing corticospinal excitability bilaterally: Validation of a double-coil TMS method

BACKGROUND

For several decades, Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has been used to monitor corticospinal excitability (CSE) changes in various contexts. Habitually, single-coil TMS is applied over one primary motor cortex (M1), eliciting motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in a contralateral limb muscle, usually a hand effector. However, in many situations, it would be useful to obtain MEPs in both hands simultaneously, to track CSE bilaterally. Such an approach requires stimulating both M1 concurrently while avoiding interference between the two descending stimuli.

NEW METHOD

We examined MEPs obtained at rest using a double-coil TMS approach where the two M1 are stimulated with a 1ms inter-pulse interval (double-coil_1ms). MEPs were acquired using double-coil_1ms (MEP_double) or single-coil (MEP_single) TMS, at five different intensities of stimulation (100, 115, 130, 145 or 160% of the resting motor threshold, rMT). Given the 1ms inter-pulse interval in double-coil_1ms trials, MEP_double were either evoked by a 1st (MEP_double-1) or a 2nd (MEP_double-2) TMS pulse.

RESULTS

All MEP_TYPE (MEP_TYPE=MEP_single, MEP_double-1 and MEP_double-2) were equivalent, regardless of the hand within which they were elicited, the intensity of stimulation or the pulse order.

COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD

This method allows one to observe state-related CSE changes for the two hands simultaneously on a trial-by-trial basis.

CONCLUSION

These results infer the absence of any neural interactions between the two cortico-spinal volleys with double-coil_1ms TMS. Hence, this technique can be reliably used to assess CSE bilaterally, opening new research perspectives for scientists interested in physiological markers of activity in the motor output system.

Physiological Markers of Motor Inhibition during Human Behavior

Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies in humans have shown that many behaviors engage processes that suppress excitability within the corticospinal tract. Inhibition of the motor output pathway has been extensively studied in the context of action stopping, where a planned movement needs to be abruptly aborted. Recent TMS work has also revealed markers of motor inhibition during the preparation of movement. Here, we review the evidence for motor inhibition during action stopping and action preparation, focusing on studies that have used TMS to monitor changes in the excitability of the corticospinal pathway. We discuss how these physiological results have motivated theoretical models of how the brain selects actions, regulates movement initiation and execution, and switches from one state to another.

Individual Differences in Resting Corticospinal Excitability Are Correlated with Reaction Time and GABA Content in Motor Cortex

Individuals differ in the intrinsic excitability of their corticospinal pathways and, perhaps more generally, their entire nervous system. At present, we have little understanding of the mechanisms underlying these differences and how variation in intrinsic excitability relates to behavior. Here, we examined the relationship between individual differences in intrinsic corticospinal excitability, local cortical GABA levels, and reaction time (RT) in a group of 20 healthy human adults. We measured corticospinal excitability at rest with transcranial magnetic stimulation, local concentrations of basal GABA with magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and RT with a behavioral task. All measurements were repeated in two separate sessions, and tests of reliability confirmed the presence of stable individual differences. There was a negative correlation between corticospinal excitability and RT, such that larger motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) measured at rest were associated with faster RTs. Interestingly, larger MEPs were associated with higher levels of GABA in M1, but not in three other cortical regions. Together, these results suggest that individuals with more excitable corticospinal pathways are faster to initiate planned responses and have higher levels of GABA within M1, possibly to compensate for a more excitable motor system.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT This study brings together physiological, behavioral, and neurochemical evidence to examine variability in the excitability of the human motor system. Previous work has focused on state-based factors (e.g., preparedness, uncertainty), with little attention given to the influence of inherent stable characteristics. Here, we examined how the excitability of the motor system relates to reaction time and the regional content of the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA. Importantly, motor pathway excitability and GABA concentrations were measured at rest, outside a task context, providing assays of intrinsic properties of the individuals. Individuals with more excitable motor pathways had faster reaction times and, paradoxically, higher concentrations of GABA. We propose that greater GABA capacity in the motor cortex counteracts an intrinsically more excitable motor system.

Effect of Aging on Motor Inhibition during Action Preparation under Sensory Conflict

Motor behaviors often require refraining from selecting options that may be part of the repertoire of natural response tendencies but that are in conflict with ongoing goals. The presence of sensory conflict has a behavioral cost but the latter can be attenuated in contexts where control processes are recruited because conflict is expected in advance, producing a behavioral gain compared to contexts where conflict occurs in a less predictable way. In the present study, we investigated the corticospinal correlates of these behavioral effects (both conflict-driven cost and context-related gain). To do so, we measured motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex (M1) of young and healthy older adults performing the Eriksen Flanker Task. Subjects performed button-presses according to a central arrow, flanked by irrelevant arrows pointing in the same (congruent trial) or opposite direction (incongruent trial). Conflict expectation was manipulated by changing the probability of congruent and incongruent trials in a given block. It was either high (mostly incongruent blocks, MIB, 80% incongruent trials) or low (mostly congruent blocks, MCB, 80% congruent). The MEP data indicate that the conflict-driven behavioral cost is associated with a strong increase in inappropriate motor activity regardless of the age of individuals, as revealed by larger MEPs in the non-responding muscle in incongruent than in congruent trials. However, this aberrant facilitation disappeared in both groups of subjects when conflict could be anticipated (i.e., in the MIBs) compared to when it occurred in a less predictably way (MCBs), probably allowing the behavioral gain observed in both the young and the older individuals. Hence, the ability to overcome and anticipate conflict was surprisingly preserved in the older adults. Nevertheless, some control processes are likely to evolve with age because the behavioral gain observed in the MIB context was associated with an attenuated suppression of MEPs at the time of the imperative signal (i.e., before conflict is actually detected) in older individuals, suggesting altered motor inhibition, compared to young individuals. In addition, the behavioral analysis suggests that young and older adults rely on different strategies to cope with conflict, including a change in speed-accuracy tradeoff.

Primary motor cortex contributes to the implementation of implicit value-based rules during motor decisions

In the present study, we investigated the functional contribution of the human primary motor cortex (M1) to motor decisions. Continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS) was used to alter M1 activity while participants performed a decision-making task in which the reward associated with the subjects' responses (right hand finger movements) depended on explicit and implicit value-based rules. Subjects performed the task over two consecutive days and cTBS occurred in the middle of Day 2, once the subjects were just about to implement implicit rules, in addition to the explicit instructions, to choose their responses, as evident in the control group (cTBS over the right somatosensory cortex). Interestingly, cTBS over the left M1 prevented subjects from implementing the implicit value-based rule while its implementation was enhanced in the group receiving cTBS over the right M1. Hence, cTBS had opposite effects depending on whether it was applied on the contralateral or ipsilateral M1. The use of the explicit value-based rule was unaffected by cTBS in the three groups of subject. Overall, the present study provides evidence for a functional contribution of M1 to the implementation of freshly acquired implicit rules, possibly through its involvement in a cortico-subcortical network controlling value-based motor decisions.

Comparison of Motor Inhibition in Variants of the Instructed-Delay Choice Reaction Time Task

Using instructed-delay choice reaction time (RT) paradigms, many previous studies have shown that the motor system is transiently inhibited during response preparation: motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex are typically suppressed during the delay period. This effect has been observed in both selected and non-selected effectors, although MEP changes in selected effectors have been more inconsistent across task versions. Here, we compared changes in MEP amplitudes in three different variants of an instructed-delay choice RT task. All variants required participants to choose between left and right index finger movements but the responses were either provided “in the air” (Variant 1), on a regular keyboard (Variant 2), or on a response device designed to control from premature responses (Variant 3). The task variants also differed according to the visual layout (more concrete in Variant 3) and depending on whether participants received a feedback of their performance (absent in Variant 1). Behavior was globally comparable between the three variants of the task although the propensity to respond prematurely was highest in Variant 2 and lowest in Variant 3. MEPs elicited in a non-selected hand were similarly suppressed in the three variants of the task. However, significant differences emerged when considering MEPs elicited in the selected hand: these MEPs were suppressed in Variants 1 and 3 whereas they were often facilitated in Variant 2, especially in the right dominant hand. In conclusion, MEPs elicited in selected muscles seem to be more sensitive to small variations to the task design than those recorded in non-selected effectors, probably because they reflect a complex combination of inhibitory and facilitatory influences on the motor output system. Finally, the use of a standard keyboard seems to be particularly inappropriate because it encourages participants to respond promptly with no means to control for premature responses, probably increasing the relative amount of facilitatory influences at the time motor inhibition is probed.

A Double-Coil TMS Method to Assess Corticospinal Excitability Changes at a Near-Simultaneous Time in the Two Hands during Movement Preparation

Background: Many previous transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies have investigated corticospinal excitability changes occurring when choosing which hand to use for an action, one of the most frequent decision people make in daily life. So far, these studies have applied single-pulse TMS eliciting motor-evoked potential (MEP) in one hand when this hand is either selected or non-selected. Using such method, hand choices were shown to entail the operation of two inhibitory mechanisms, suppressing MEPs in the targeted hand either when it is non-selected (competition resolution, CR) or selected (impulse control, IC). However, an important limitation of this “Single-Coil” method is that MEPs are elicited in selected and non-selected conditions during separate trials and thus those two settings may not be completely comparable. Moreover, a more important problem is that MEPs are computed in relation to the movement of different hands. The goal of the present study was to test a “Double-Coil” method to evaluate IC and CR preceding the same hand responses by applying Double-Coil TMS over the two primary motor cortices (M1) at a near-simultaneous time (1 ms inter-pulse interval).

Methods: MEPs were obtained in the left (MEP_LEFT) and right (MEP_RIGHT) hands while subjects chose between left and right hand key-presses in blocks using a Single-Coil or a Double-Coil method; in the latter blocks, TMS was either applied over left M1 first (TMS_LRM1 group, n = 12) or right M1 first (TMS_RLM1 group, n = 12).

Results: MEP_LEFT were suppressed preceding both left (IC) and right (CR) hand responses whereas MEP_RIGHT were only suppressed preceding left (CR) but not right (IC) hand responses. This result was observed regardless of whether Single-Coil or Double-Coil TMS was applied in the two subject groups. However, in the TMS_LRM1 group, the MEP suppression was attenuated in Double-Coil compared to Single-Coil blocks for both IC and CR, when probed with MEP_LEFT (elicited by the second pulse).

Conclusions: Although Double-Coil TMS may be a reliable method to assess bilateral motor excitability provided that a RM1-LM1 pulse order is used, further experiments are required to understand the reduced MEP_LEFT changes in Double-Coil blocks when the LM1-RM1 pulse order was used.

Nonspecific Inhibition of the Motor System during Response Preparation

Motor system excitability is transiently inhibited during the preparation of responses. Previous studies have attributed this inhibition to the operation of two mechanisms, one hypothesized to help resolve competition between alternative response options, and the other to prevent premature response initiation. By this view, inhibition should be restricted to task-relevant muscles. Although this prediction is supported in one previous study (Duque et al., 2010), studies of stopping ongoing actions suggest that some forms of motor inhibition may be widespread (Badry et al., 2009). This motivated us to conduct a series of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) experiments to examine in detail the specificity of preparatory inhibition in humans. Motor-evoked potentials were inhibited in task-irrelevant muscles during response preparation, even when the muscles were contralateral and not homologous to the responding effector. Inhibition was also observed in both choice and simple response task conditions, with and without a preparatory interval. Control experiments ruled out that this inhibition is due to expectancy of TMS or a possible need to cancel the prepared response. These findings suggest that motor inhibition during response preparation broadly influences the motor system and likely reflects a process that occurs whenever a response is selected. We propose a reinterpretation of the functional significance of preparatory inhibition, one by which inhibition reduces noise to enhance signal processing and modulates the gain of a selected response.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT

Motor preparation entails the recruitment of excitatory and inhibitory neural mechanisms. The current experiments address the specificity of inhibitory mechanisms, asking whether preparatory inhibition affects task-irrelevant muscles. Participants prepared a finger movement to be executed at the end of a short delay period. Transcranial magnetic stimulation over primary motor cortex provided an assay of corticospinal excitability. Consistent with earlier work, the agonist muscle for the forthcoming response was inhibited during the preparatory period. Moreover, this inhibition was evident in task-irrelevant muscles, although the magnitude of inhibition depended on whether the response was fixed or involved a choice. These results implicate a broadly tuned inhibitory mechanism that facilitates response preparation, perhaps by lowering background activity before response initiation.

Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

Preparing actions requires the operation of several cognitive control processes that influence the state of the motor system to ensure that the appropriate behavior is ultimately selected and executed. For example, some form of competition resolution ensures that the right action is chosen among alternatives, often in the presence of conflict; at the same time, impulse control ought to be deployed to prevent premature responses. Here we review how state-changes in the human motor system during action preparation can be studied through motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation over the contralateral primary motor cortex (M1). We discuss how the physiological fingerprints afforded by MEPs have helped to decompose some of the dynamic and effector-specific influences on the motor system during action preparation. We focus on competition resolution, conflict and impulse control, as well as on the influence of higher cognitive decision–related variables. The selected examples demonstrate the usefulness of MEPs as physiological readouts for decomposing the influence of distinct, but often overlapping, control processes on the human motor system during action preparation.

Motor interference in interactive contexts

Action observation and execution share overlapping neural substrates, so that simultaneous activation by observation and execution modulates motor performance. Previous literature on simple prehension tasks has revealed that motor influence can be two-sided: facilitation for observed and performed congruent actions and interference for incongruent actions. But little is known of the specific modulations of motor performance in complex forms of interaction. Is it possible that the very same observed movement can lead either to interference or facilitation effects on a temporally overlapping congruent executed action, depending on the context? To answer this question participants were asked to perform a reach-to-grasp movement adopting a precision grip (PG) while: (i) observing a fixation cross, (ii) observing an actor performing a PG with interactive purposes, (iii) observing an actor performing a PG without interactive purposes. In particular, in the interactive condition the actor was shown trying to pour some sugar on a large cup located out of her reach but close to the participant watching the video, thus eliciting in reaction a complementary whole-hand grasp. Notably, fine-grained kinematic analysis for this condition revealed a specific delay in the grasping and reaching components and an increased trajectory deviation despite the observed and executed movement’s congruency. Moreover, early peaks of trajectory deviation seem to indicate that socially relevant stimuli are acknowledged by the motor system very early. These data suggest that interactive contexts can determine a prompt modulation of stimulus–response compatibility effects.

Influence of Delay Period Duration on Inhibitory Processes for Response Preparation

In this study, we examined the dynamics of inhibitory preparatory processes, using a delayed response task in which a cue signaled a left or right index finger (Experiment 1) or hand (Experiment 2) movement in advance of an imperative signal. In Experiment 1, we varied the duration of the delay period (200, 500, and 900 ms). When transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was applied 100 ms before the imperative, motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited in the first dorsal interosseous were strongly inhibited. For delays of 500 ms or longer, this inhibition was greater when the targeted muscle was selected compared with when it was not selected. In contrast, the magnitude of inhibition just after the cue was inversely related to the duration of the delay period, and the difference between the selected and nonselected conditions was attenuated. In Experiment 2, TMS and peripheral nerve stimulation procedures were used during a 300-ms delay period. MEPs in the flexor carpi radialis for both selected and nonselected conditions were inhibited, but without any change in the H-reflex. Taken together, these results reveal the dual influence of temporal constraints associated with anticipation and urgency on inhibitory processes recruited during response preparation.

Training voluntary motor suppression with real-time feedback of motor evoked potentials

Training people to suppress motor representations voluntarily could improve response control. We evaluated a novel training procedure of real-time feedback of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) generated by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over motor cortex. On each trial, a cue instructed participants to use a mental strategy to suppress a particular finger representation without overt movement. A single pulse of TMS was delivered over motor cortex, and an MEP-derived measure of hand motor excitability was delivered visually to the participant within 500 ms. In experiment 1, we showed that participants learned to reduce the excitability of a particular finger beneath baseline (selective motor suppression) within 30 min of practice. In experiment 2, we performed a double-blind study with 2 training groups (1 with veridical feedback and 1 with matched sham feedback) to show that selective motor suppression depends on the veridical feedback itself. Experiment 3 further demonstrated the importance of veridical feedback by showing that selective motor suppression did not arise from mere mental imagery, even when incentivized with reward. Thus participants can use real-time feedback of TMS-induced MEPs to discover an effective mental strategy for selective motor suppression. This high-temporal-resolution, trial-by-trial-feedback training method could be used to help people better control response tendencies and may serve as a potential therapy for motor disorders such as Tourette's and dystonia.

Inhibition during response preparation is sensitive to response complexity

Motor system excitability is transiently suppressed during the preparation of movement. This preparatory inhibition is hypothesized to facilitate response selection and initiation. Given that demands on selection and initiation processes increase with movement complexity, we hypothesized that complexity would influence preparatory inhibition. To test this hypothesis, we probed corticospinal excitability during a delayed-response task in which participants were cued to prepare right- or left-hand movements of varying complexity. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was applied over right primary motor cortex to elicit motor evoked potentials (MEPs) from the first dorsal interosseous (FDI) of the left hand. MEP suppression was greater during the preparation of responses involving coordination of the FDI and adductor digiti minimi relative to easier responses involving only the FDI, independent of which hand was cued to respond. In contrast, this increased inhibition was absent when the complex responses required sequential movements of the two muscles. Moreover, complexity did not influence the level of inhibition when the response hand was fixed for the trial block, regardless of whether the complex responses were performed simultaneously or sequentially. These results suggest that preparatory inhibition contributes to response selection, possibly by suppressing extraneous movements when responses involve the simultaneous coordination of multiple effectors.

Dissociating the influence of response selection and task anticipation on corticospinal suppression during response preparation

Motor behavior requires selecting between potential actions. The role of inhibition in response selection has frequently been examined in tasks in which participants are engaged in some advance preparation prior to the presentation of an imperative signal. Under such conditions, inhibition could be related to processes associated with response selection, or to more general inhibitory processes that are engaged in high states of anticipation. In Experiment 1, we manipulated the degree of anticipatory preparation. Participants performed a choice reaction time task that required choosing between a movement of the left or right index finger, and used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to elicit motor evoked potentials (MEPs) in the left hand agonist. In high anticipation blocks, a non-informative cue (e.g., fixation marker) preceded the imperative; in low anticipation blocks, there was no cue and participants were required to divide their attention between two tasks to further reduce anticipation. MEPs were substantially reduced before the imperative signal in high anticipation blocks. In contrast, in low anticipation blocks, MEPs remained unchanged before the imperative signal but showed a marked suppression right after the onset of the imperative. This effect occurred regardless of whether the imperative had signalled a left or right hand response. After this initial inhibition, left MEPs increased when the left hand was selected and remained suppressed when the right hand was selected. We obtained similar results in Experiment 2 except that the persistent left MEP suppression when the left hand was not selected was attenuated when the alternative response involved a non-homologous effector (right foot). These results indicate that, even in the absence of an anticipatory period, inhibitory mechanisms are engaged during response selection, possibly to prevent the occurrence of premature and inappropriate responses during a competitive selection process.