Phase- and Workload-Dependent Changes in Corticospinal Excitability to the Biceps and Triceps Brachii during Arm Cycling

Location-specific cutaneous electrical stimulation of the footsole modulates corticospinal excitability to the plantarflexors and dorsiflexors during standing

Non‐noxious electrical stimulation to distinct locations of the foot sole evokes location‐specific cutaneous reflex responses in lower limb muscles. These reflexes occur at latencies that may enable them to be mediated via a transcortical pathway. Corticospinal excitability to the plantarflexors and dorsiflexors was measured in 16 participants using motor evoked potentials (MEPs). Spinal excitability was measured in eight of the original participants using cervicomedullary motor evoked potentials (CMEPs). Measurements were collected with and without preceding cutaneous stimulus to either the heel (HEEL) or metatarsal (MET) locations of the foot sole, and evoked potentials were elicited to coincide with the arrival of the cutaneous volley at either the motor cortex or spinal cord. Plantarflexor MEPs and CMEPs were facilitated with cutaneous stimulation to the HEEL for MEPs (soleus p = 0.04, medial gastrocnemius (MG) p = 0.017) and CMEPs (soleus p = 0.047 and MG p = 0.015), but they were unchanged following MET stimulation for MEPs or CMEPs. Dorsiflexor MEPs were unchanged with cutaneous stimulation at either location, but dorsiflexor CMEPs increased with cutaneous stimulation (p = 0.05). In general, the increase in CMEP amplitudes was larger than the increase in MEP amplitudes, indicating that an increase in spinal excitability likely explains most of the increase in corticospinal excitability. The larger change observed in the CMEP also indicates that excitability from supraspinal sources likely decreased, which could be due to a net change in the excitability of intracortical circuits. This study provides evidence that cutaneous reflexes from foot sole skin are likely influenced by a transcortical pathway.

Moving forward: methodological considerations for assessing corticospinal excitability during rhythmic motor output in humans

The use of transcranial magnetic stimulation to assess the excitability of the central nervous system to further understand the neural control of human movement is expansive. The majority of the work performed to-date has assessed corticospinal excitability either at rest or during relatively simple isometric contractions. The results from this work are not easily extrapolated to rhythmic, dynamic motor outputs, given that corticospinal excitability is task-, phase-, intensity-, direction-, and muscle-dependent (Power KE, Lockyer EJ, Forman DA, Button DC. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 43: 1176-1185, 2018). Assessing corticospinal excitability during rhythmic motor output, however, involves technical challenges that are to be overcome, or at the minimum considered, when attempting to design experiments and interpret the physiological relevance of the results. The purpose of this narrative review is to highlight the research examining corticospinal excitability during a rhythmic motor output and, importantly, to provide recommendations regarding the many factors that must be considered when designing and interpreting findings from studies that involve limb movement. To do so, the majority of work described herein refers to work performed using arm cycling (arm pedaling or arm cranking) as a model of a rhythmic motor output used to examine the neural control of human locomotion.

The Effect of Crank Resistance on Arm Configuration and Muscle Activation Variances in Arm Cycling Movements

Arm cycling on an ergometer is common in sports training and rehabilitation protocols. The hand movement is constrained along a circular path, and the user is working against a resistance, maintaining a cadence. Even if the desired hand trajectory is given, there is the flexibility to choose patterns of joint coordination and muscle activation, given the kinematic redundancy of the upper limb. With changing external load, motor noise and changing joint stiffness may affect the pose of the arm even though the endpoint trajectory is unchanged. The objective of this study was to examine how the crank resistance influences the variances of joint configuration and muscle activation. Fifteen healthy participants performed arm cranking on an arm-cycle ergometer both unimanually and bimanually with a cadence of 60 rpm against three crank resistances. Joint configuration was represented in a 3-dimensional joint space defined by inter-segmental joint angles, while muscle activation in a 4-dimensional "muscle activation space" defined by EMGs of 4 arm muscles. Joint configuration variance in the course of arm cranking was not affected by crank resistance, whereas muscle activation variance was proportional to the square of muscle activation. The shape of the variance time profiles for both joint configuration and muscle activation was not affected by crank resistance. Contrary to the prevailing assumption that an increased motor noise would affect the variance of auxiliary movements, the influence of noise doesn't appear at the joint configuration level even when the system is redundant. Our results suggest the separation of kinematic- and force-control, via mechanisms that are compensating for dynamic nonlinearities. Arm cranking may be suitable when the aim is to perform training under different load conditions, preserving stable and secure control of joint movements and muscle activations.

Changes in muscle activity during the flexion and extension phases of arm cycling as an effect of power output are muscle-specific

Arm cycling is commonly used in rehabilitation settings for individuals with motor impairments in an attempt to facilitate neural plasticity, potentially leading to enhanced motor function in the affected limb(s). Studies examining the neural control of arm cycling, however, typically cycle using a set cadence and power output. Given the importance of motor output intensity, typically represented by the amplitude of electromyographic (EMG) activity, on neural excitability, surprisingly little is known about how arm muscle activity is modulated using relative workloads. Thus, the objective of this study was to characterize arm muscle activity during arm cycling at different relative workloads. Participants (n = 11) first completed a 10-second maximal arm ergometry sprint to determine peak power output (PPO) followed by 11 randomized trials of 20-second arm cycling bouts ranging from 5–50% of PPO (5% increments) and a standard 25 W workload. All submaximal trials were completed at 60 rpm. Integrated EMG amplitude (iEMG) was assessed from the biceps brachii, brachioradialis, triceps brachii, flexor carpi radialis, extensor carpi radialis and anterior deltoid of the dominant arm. Arm cycling was separated into two phases, flexion and extension, relative to the elbow joint for all comparisons. As expected, iEMG amplitude increased during both phases of cycling for all muscles examined. With the exception of the triceps brachii and extensor carpi radialis, iEMG amplitudes differed between the flexion and extension phases. Finally, there was a linear relationship between iEMG amplitude and the %PPO for all muscles during both elbow flexion and extension.

Sustained Isometric Wrist Flexion and Extension Maximal Voluntary Contractions on Corticospinal Excitability to Forearm Muscles during Low-Intensity Hand-Gripping

The wrist extensors demonstrate an earlier fatigue onset than the wrist flexors. However, it is currently unclear whether fatigue induces unique changes in muscle activity or corticospinal excitability between these muscle groups. The purpose of this study was to examine how sustained isometric wrist extension/flexion maximal voluntary contractions (MVCs) influence muscle activity and corticospinal excitability of the forearm. Corticospinal excitability to three wrist flexors and three wrist extensors were measured using motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited via transcranial magnetic stimulation. Responses were elicited while participants exerted 10% of their maximal handgrip force, before and after a sustained wrist flexion or extension MVC (performed on separate sessions). Post-fatigue measures were collected up to 10-min post-fatigue. Immediately post-fatigue, extensor muscle activity was significantly greater following the wrist flexion fatigue session, although corticospinal excitability (normalized to muscle activity) was greater on the wrist extension day. Responses were largely unchanged in the wrist flexors. However, for the flexor carpi ulnaris, normalized MEP amplitudes were significantly larger following wrist extension fatigue. These findings demonstrate that sustained isometric flexion/extension MVCs result in a complex reorganization of forearm muscle recruitment strategies during hand-gripping. Based on these findings, previously observed corticospinal behaviour following fatigue may not apply when the fatiguing task and measurement task are different.

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.

Corticospinal-Evoked Responses from the Biceps Brachii during Arm Cycling across Multiple Power Outputs

Background: We examined corticospinal and spinal excitability across multiple power outputs during arm cycling using a weak and strong stimulus intensity. Methods: We elicited motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and cervicomedullary motor evoked potentials (CMEPs) in the biceps brachii using magnetic stimulation over the motor cortex and electrical stimulation of corticospinal axons during arm cycling at six different power outputs (i.e., 25, 50, 100, 150, 200 and 250 W) and two stimulation intensities (i.e., weak vs. strong). Results: In general, biceps brachii MEP and CMEP amplitudes (normalized to maximal M-wave (M_max)) followed a similar pattern of modulation with increases in cycling intensity at both stimulation strengths. Specifically, MEP and CMEP amplitudes increased up until ~150 W and ~100 W when the weak and strong stimulations were used, respectively. Further increases in cycling intensity revealed no changes on MEP or CMEP amplitudes for either stimulation strength. Conclusions: In general, MEPs and CMEPs changed in a similar manner, suggesting that increases and subsequent plateaus in overall excitability are likely mediated by spinal factors. Interestingly, however, MEP amplitudes were disproportionately larger than CMEP amplitudes as power output increased, despite being initially matched in amplitude, particularly with strong stimulation. This suggests that supraspinal excitability is enhanced to a larger degree than spinal excitability as the power output of arm cycling increases.

Muscle length and joint angle influence spinal but not corticospinal excitability to the biceps brachii across forearm postures

Forearm rotation (supination/pronation) alters corticospinal excitability to the biceps brachii, but it is unclear whether corticospinal excitability is influenced by joint angle, muscle length, or both. Thus the purpose of this study was to separately examine elbow joint angle and muscle length on corticospinal excitability. Corticospinal excitability to the biceps and triceps brachii was measured using motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited via transcranial magnetic stimulation. Spinal excitability was measured using cervicomedullary motor evoked potentials (CMEPs) elicited via transmastoid electrical stimulation. Elbow angles were manipulated with a fixed biceps brachii muscle length (and vice versa) across five unique postures: 1) forearm neutral, elbow flexion 90°; 2) forearm supinated, elbow flexion 90°; 3) forearm pronated, elbow flexion 90°; 4) forearm supinated, elbow flexion 78°; and 5) forearm pronated, elbow flexion 113°. A musculoskeletal model determined biceps brachii muscle length for postures 1-3, and elbow joint angles (postures 4-5) were selected to maintain biceps length across forearm orientations. MEPs and CMEPs were elicited at rest and during an isometric contraction of 10% of maximal biceps muscle activity. At rest, MEP amplitudes to the biceps were largest during supination, which was independent of elbow joint angle. CMEP amplitudes were not different when the elbow was fixed at 90° but were largest in pronation when muscle length was controlled. During an isometric contraction, there were no significant differences across forearm postures for either MEP or CMEP amplitudes. These results highlight that elbow joint angle and biceps brachii muscle length can each independently influence spinal excitability. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Changes in upper limb posture can influence the responsiveness of the central nervous system to artificial stimulations. We established a novel approach integrating neurophysiology techniques with biomechanical modeling. Through this approach, the effects of elbow joint angle and biceps brachii muscle length on corticospinal and spinal excitability were assessed. We demonstrate that spinal excitability is uniquely influenced by joint angle and muscle length, and this highlights the importance of accounting for muscle length in neurophysiological studies.

Understanding exercise-dependent plasticity of motoneurons using intracellular and intramuscular approaches

Spinal motoneurons (MN) exhibit exercise-dependent adaptations to increased activity, such as exercise and locomotion, as well as decreased activity associated with disuse, spinal cord injury, and aging. The development of several experimental approaches, in both human and animal models, has contributed significantly to our understanding of this plasticity. The purpose of this review is to summarize how intracellular recordings in an animal model and motor unit recordings in a human model have, together, contributed to our current understanding of exercise-dependent MN plasticity. These approaches and techniques will allow neuroscientists to continue to advance our understanding of MN physiology and the plasticity of the "final common path" of the motor system, and to design experiments to answer the critical questions that are emerging in this field.

The Time Course of Motoneuronal Excitability during the Preparation of Complex Movements

For a simple RT task, movement complexity increases RT and also corticospinal excitability, as measured by the motor evoked potential (MEP) elicited by TMS of the motor cortex. However, it is unknown if complexity-related increases in corticospinal excitability during the preparation of movement are mediated at the cortical or spinal level. The purposes of this study were to establish a time course of motoneuronal excitability before prime mover activation and to assess task-dependent effects of complex movements on motoneuronal and cortical excitability in a simple RT paradigm. It was hypothesized that motoneuronal and cortical excitability would increase before prime mover activation and in response to movement complexity. In a seated position, participants completed ballistic elbow extension/flexion movements with their dominant arm to one, two, or three targets. TMS and transmastoid stimulation (TS) were delivered at 0%, 70%, 80% or 90% of mean premotor RT for each complexity level. Stimulus intensities were set to elicit MEPs and cervicomedullary MEPs (CMEPs) of ∼10% of the maximal M-wave in the triceps brachii. Compared with 0% RT, motoneuronal excitability (CMEP amplitude) was already 10% greater at 70% RT. CMEP amplitude also increased with movement complexity as both the two- and three-movement conditions had greater motoneuronal excitability than the one-movement condition (p < .038). Importantly, when normalized to the CMEP, there was no increase in MEP amplitude. This suggests that complexity-related increases in corticospinal excitability are likely to be mediated more by increased excitability at a motoneuronal than cortical level.

Corticospinal Excitability to the Biceps Brachii is Not Different When Arm Cycling at a Self-Selected or Fixed Cadence

Background: The present study compared corticospinal excitability to the biceps brachii muscle during arm cycling at a self-selected and a fixed cadence (SSC and FC, respectively). We hypothesized that corticospinal excitability would not be different between the two conditions. Methods: The SSC was initially performed and the cycling cadence was recorded every 5 s for one minute. The average cadence of the SSC cycling trial was then used as a target for the FC of cycling that the participants were instructed to maintain. The motor evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited via transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the motor cortex were recorded from the biceps brachii during each trial of SSC and FC arm cycling. Results: Corticospinal excitability, as assessed via normalized MEP amplitudes (MEPs were made relative to a maximal compound muscle action potential), was not different between groups. Conclusions: Focusing on maintaining a fixed cadence during arm cycling does not influence corticospinal excitability, as assessed via TMS-evoked MEPs.

On task: Considerations and future directions for studies of corticospinal excitability in exercise neuroscience and related disciplines

Over the last few decades, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has emerged as a conventional laboratory technique in human neurophysiological research. Exercise neuroscientists have used TMS to study central nervous system contributions to fatigue, training, and performance in health, injury, and disease. In such studies, corticospinal excitability is often assessed at rest or during simple isometric tasks with the implication that the results may be extrapolated to more functional and complex movement outside of the laboratory. However, the neural mechanisms that influence corticospinal excitability are both state- and task-dependent. Furthermore, there are many sites of modulation along the pathway from the motor cortex to the muscle; a fact that is somewhat obscured by the all-encompassing and poorly defined term “corticospinal excitability”. Therefore, the tasks we use to assess corticospinal excitability and the conclusions that we draw from such a global measure of the motor pathway must be taken into consideration. The overall objective of this review is to highlight the task-dependent nature of corticospinal excitability and the tools used to assess modulation at cortical and spinal sites of modulation. By weighing the advantages and constraints of conventional approaches to studying corticospinal excitability, and considering some new and novel approaches, we will continue to advance our understanding of the neural control of movement during exercise.

Neuromuscular fatigue during repeated sprint exercise: underlying physiology and methodological considerations

Neuromuscular fatigue occurs when an individual’s capacity to produce force or power is impaired. Repeated sprint exercise requires an individual to physically exert themselves at near-maximal to maximal capacity for multiple short-duration bouts, is extremely taxing on the neuromuscular system, and consequently leads to the rapid development of neuromuscular fatigue. During repeated sprint exercise the development of neuromuscular fatigue is underlined by a combination of central and peripheral fatigue. However, there are a number of methodological considerations that complicate the quantification of the development of neuromuscular fatigue. The main goal of this review is to synthesize the results from recent investigations on the development of neuromuscular fatigue during repeated sprint exercise. Hence, we summarize the overall development of neuromuscular fatigue, explain how recovery time may alter the development of neuromuscular fatigue, outline the contributions of peripheral and central fatigue to neuromuscular fatigue, and provide some methodological considerations for quantifying neuromuscular fatigue during repeated sprint exercise.

Modulation of motoneurone excitability during rhythmic motor outputs

In quadrupeds, special circuity located within the spinal cord, referred to as central pattern generators (CPGs), is capable of producing complex patterns of activity such as locomotion in the absence of descending input. During these motor outputs, the electrical properties of spinal motoneurones are modulated such that the motoneurone is more easily activated. Indirect evidence suggests that like quadrupeds, humans also have spinally located CPGs capable of producing locomotor outputs, albeit descending input is considered to be of greater importance. Whether motoneurone properties are reconfigured in a similar manner to those of quadrupeds is unclear. The purpose of this review is to summarize our current state of knowledge regarding the modulation of motoneurone excitability during CPG-mediated motor outputs using animal models. This will be followed by more recent work initially aimed at understanding changes in motoneurone excitability during CPG-mediated motor outputs in humans, which quickly expanded to also include supraspinal excitability.

Intensity matters: effects of cadence and power output on corticospinal excitability during arm cycling are phase and muscle dependent

The present study investigated the effects of cadence and power output on corticospinal excitability to the biceps (BB) and triceps brachii (TB) during arm cycling. Supraspinal and spinal excitability were assessed using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the motor cortex and transmastoid electrical stimulation (TMES) of the corticospinal tract, respectively. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) elicited by TMS and cervicomedullary motor-evoked potentials (CMEPs) elicited by TMES were recorded at two positions during arm cycling corresponding to mid-elbow flexion and mid-elbow extension (i.e., 6 and 12 o'clock made relative to a clock face, respectively). Arm cycling was performed at combinations of two cadences (60 and 90 rpm) at three relative power outputs (20, 40, and 60% peak power output). At the 6 o'clock position, BB MEPs increased ~11.5% as cadence increased and up to ~57.2% as power output increased ( P < 0.05). In the TB, MEPs increased ~15.2% with cadence ( P = 0.013) but were not affected by power output, while CMEPs increased with cadence (~16.3%) and power output (up to ~19.1%, P < 0.05). At the 12 o'clock position, BB MEPs increased ~26.8% as cadence increased and up to ~96.1% as power output increased ( P < 0.05), while CMEPs decreased ~29.7% with cadence ( P = 0.013) and did not change with power output ( P = 0.851). In contrast, TB MEPs were not different with cadence or power output, while CMEPs increased ~12.8% with cadence and up to ~23.1% with power output ( P < 0.05). These data suggest that the "type" of intensity differentially modulates supraspinal and spinal excitability in a manner that is phase- and muscle dependent. NEW & NOTEWORTHY There is currently little information available on how changes in locomotor intensity influence excitability within the corticospinal pathway. This study investigated the effects of arm cycling intensity (i.e., alterations in cadence and power output) on corticospinal excitability projecting to the biceps and triceps brachii during arm cycling. We demonstrate that corticospinal excitability is modulated differentially by cadence and power output and that these modulations are dependent on the phase and the muscle examined.

Crossed corticospinal facilitation between arm and trunk muscles in humans

A voluntary contraction of muscles with one arm increases the excitability of corticospinal projections to the contralateral resting arm, a phenomenon known as crossed facilitation. Although many motor tasks engage simultaneous activation of the arm and trunk, interactions between corticospinal projections targeting these segments remain largely unknown. Using transcranial magnetic stimulation over the trunk representation of the primary motor cortex, we examined motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in the resting erector spinae (ES) muscle when the contralateral arm remained at rest or performed 20% of isometric maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) into index finger abduction, thumb abduction, elbow flexion, and elbow extension. We found that MEP size in the ES increased during all voluntary contractions, with greater facilitation occurring during elbow flexion and index finger abduction. To further examine the origin of changes in MEP size, we measured short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and cervicomedullary MEPs (CMEPs) in the ES muscle during elbow flexion and index finger abduction and when the arm remained at rest. Notably, SICI decreased and CMEPs remained unchanged in the ES during both voluntary contractions compared with rest, suggesting a cortical origin for the effects. Our findings reveal crossed facilitatory interactions between trunk extensor and proximal and distal arm muscles, particularly for elbow flexor and index finger muscles, likely involving cortical mechanisms. These interactions might reflect the different role of these muscles during functionally relevant arm and trunk movements. NEW & NOTEWORTHY Many of the tasks of daily life involve simultaneous activation of the arm and trunk. We found that responses in the erector spinae muscles evoked by motor cortical stimulation increased in size during elbow flexion and extension and during index finger abduction and thumb abduction. Crossed facilitation with the trunk was more pronounced during elbow flexion and index finger abduction. These results might reflect the different role of these muscles during arm and trunk movements.