Hijacking Cortical Motor Output with Repetitive Microstimulation

Griffin, Darcy M.; Hudson, Heather M.; Belhaj-Saïf, Abderraouf; Cheney, Paul D.

doi:10.1523/jneurosci.6322-10.2011

Cited by 56 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 46 publications

(57 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Microstimulation in sensory cortical areas has a long and impressive history as a means of providing sensory information to the brain [61, 34, 62]. Microstimulation in motor areas rapidly causes a movement [63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68]. We reasoned that microstimulation in sensory areas could be used to adjust an ongoing movement more rapidly than tactile stimulation, since microstimulation can bypass sensory transduction delays.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As the perturbed network settles back into a more natural configuration of activity that is capable of influencing subsequent processes, eventually resulting in behavior. These concerns are exacerbated by the consideration that microstimulation must interact with ongoing neural activity, perhaps over-riding it [68], or combining with it in complex ways. Also in support of the notion that further cortical processing may be necessary to amplify and refine artificial signals, Horwitz and colleagues [72] elicited a behavioral response with optogenetic stimulation in primary visual cortex.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparing temporal aspects of visual, tactile, and microstimulation feedback for motor control

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Current brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) rely on visual feedback, requiring sustained visual attention to use the device. Improvements to BCIs may stem from the development of an effective way to provide quick feedback independent of vision. Tactile stimuli, either delivered on the skin surface, or directly to the brain via microstimulation in somatosensory cortex, could serve that purpose. We examined the effectiveness of vibrotactile stimuli and microstimulation as a means of non-visual feedback by using a fundamental element of feedback: the ability to react to a stimulus while already in motion. Approach Human and monkey subjects performed a center-out reach task which was, on occasion, interrupted with a stimulus cue that instructed a change in reach target. Main results Subjects generally responded faster to tactile cues than to visual cues. However, when we delivered cues via microstimuation in a monkey, its average response was slower than that for both tactile and visual cues. Significance Tactile and microstimulation feedback can be used to rapidly adjust movements mid-flight. The relatively slow speed of microstimulation raises some interesting questions and warrants further investigation. Overall, these results highlight the importance of considering temporal aspects of feedback when designing alternative forms of feedback for brain-computer interfaces.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing temporal aspects of visual, tactile, and microstimulation feedback for motor control

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notably, the true ethological nature of the complex synergies evoked through DES was recently questioned by Cheney and colleagues. In monkeys, these authors provided evidence that postural synergies evoked through cortical stimulation were not produced by natural patterns of EMG activity but instead resulted from an unnatural co-contraction of numerous 'hijacked' muscles that forced the limb to an equilibrium point [74,75]. However, the generality of these observations remains debatable for at least three reasons.…”

Section: Mapping Complex Sensorimotor Synergiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revealing humans’ sensorimotor functions with electrical cortical stimulation

Desmurget

Sirigu

2015

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One contribution of 15 to a theme issue 'Controlling brain activity to alter perception, behaviour and society'. Direct electrical stimulation (DES) of the human brain has been used by neurosurgeons for almost a century. Although this procedure serves only clinical purposes, it generates data that have a great scientific interest. Had DES not been employed, our comprehension of the organization of the sensorimotor systems involved in movement execution, language production, the emergence of action intentionality or the subjective feeling of movement awareness would have been greatly undermined. This does not mean, of course, that DES is a gold standard devoid of limitations and that other approaches are not of primary importance, including electrophysiology, modelling, neuroimaging or psychophysics in patients and healthy subjects. Rather, this indicates that the contribution of DES cannot be restricted, in humans, to the ubiquitous concepts of homunculus and somatotopy. DES is a fundamental tool in our attempt to understand the human brain because it represents a unique method for mapping sensorimotor pathways and interfering with the functioning of localized neural populations during the performance of well-defined behavioural tasks.

show abstract

“…At the level of primary motor cortex, both intrinsic and extrinsic parameters may be represented (Kakei et al 1999), and extrinsic representations may take the form of preferred fragments of movement trajectories (Hatsopoulos and Amit 2012). Griffin et al (2011) showed that a 500-ms train of microstimulation to motor cortex can replace the high-level command for a certain target balance of muscle activity with a different one. These authors also suggested that low-level feedback loops in the complex spinal circuitry (reviewed by Arber 2012) may help to shape the time course of the electomyographic (EMG) activity as it progresses to the new target balance.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%