Skilled performance and acquisition is dependent upon afferent input to motor cortex. The present study used short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI) to probe how manipulation of sensory afference by attention affects different circuits projecting to pyramidal tract neurons in motor cortex. SAI was assessed in the first dorsal interosseous muscle while participants performed a low or high attention demanding visual detection task. SAI was evoked by preceding a suprathreshold transcranial magnetic stimulus with electrical stimulation of the median nerve at the wrist. To isolate different afferent intracortical circuits in motor cortex SAI was evoked using either posterior-anterior (PA) or anterior-posterior (PA) monophasic current. In an independent sample, somatosensory processing during the same attention demanding visual detection tasks was assessed using somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) elicited by median nerve stimulation. SAI elicited by AP TMS was reduced under high compared to low visual attention demands. SAI elicited by PA TMS was not affected by visual attention demands. SEPs revealed that the high visual attention load reduced the fronto-central P20-N30 but not the contralateral parietal N20-P25 SEP component. P20-N30 reduction confirmed the visual attention task altered sensory afference. The current results offer further support that PA and AP TMS recruit different neuronal circuits. AP circuits may be one substrate by which cognitive strategies shape sensorimotor processing during skilled movement by altering sensory processing in premotor areas.

Verbal instruction and strategies informed by declarative memory are key to performance and acquisition of skilled actions. We previously demonstrated that anatomically distinct sensory-motor inputs converging on the corticospinal neurons of motor cortex are differentially sensitive to visual attention load. However, how loading of working memory shapes afferent input to motor cortex is unknown. This study used short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI) to probe the effect of verbal working memory upon anatomically distinct afferent circuits converging on corticospinal neurons in the motor cortex. SAI was elicited by preceding a suprathreshold transcranial magnetic stimulus (TMS) with electrical stimulation of the median nerve at the wrist while participants mentally rehearsed a two- or six-digit numeric memory set. To isolate different afferent intracortical circuits in motor cortex SAI was elicited, using TMS involving posterior-anterior (PA) or anterior-posterior (AP) monophasic current. Both PA and AP SAI were significantly reduced during maintenance of the six-digit compared to two-digit memory set. The generalized effect of working memory across anatomically distinct circuits converging upon corticospinal neurons in motor cortex is in contrast to the specific sensitivity of AP SAI to increased attention load. The common response across the PA and AP SAI circuits to increased working memory load may reflect an indiscriminate perisomatic mechanism involved in the voluntary facilitation of desired and/or suppression of unwanted actions during action selection or response conflict.

No abstract

No abstract

Knowledge of the properties that govern the effectiveness of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) interventions is critical to clinical application. Extrapolation to clinical populations has been limited by high inter-subject variability and a focus on intrinsic muscles of the hand in healthy populations. Therefore, the current study assessed variability of continuous theta burst stimulation (cTBS), a patterned TMS protocol, across an agonist–antagonist pair of extrinsic muscles of the hand. Secondarily, we assessed whether concurrent agonist contraction could enhance the efficacy of cTBS. Motor evoked potentials (MEP) were simultaneously recorded from the agonist flexor (FCR) and antagonist extensor (ECR) carpi radialis before and after cTBS over the FCR hotspot. cTBS was delivered with the FCR relaxed (cTBS-Relax) or during isometric wrist flexion (cTBS-Contract). cTBS-Relax suppressed FCR MEPs evoked from the FCR hotspot. However, the extent of FCR MEP suppression was strongly correlated with the relative difference between FCR and ECR resting motor thresholds. cTBS-Contract decreased FCR suppression but increased suppression of ECR MEPs elicited from the FCR hotspot. The magnitude of ECR MEP suppression following cTBS-Contract was independent of the threshold-amplitude relationships observed with cTBS-Relax. Contraction alone had no effect confirming the effect of cTBS-Contract was driven by the interaction between neuromuscular activity and cTBS. Interactions across muscle representations should be taken into account when predicting cTBS outcomes in healthy and clinical populations. Contraction during cTBS may be a useful means of focusing aftereffects when differences in baseline excitability across overlapping agonist–antagonist cortical representations may mitigate the inhibitory effect of cTBS.