Integration of visual feedback and motor learning: Corticospinal vs. corticobulbar pathway

Park, Seoung Hoon; Casamento‐Moran, Agostina; Singer, Michele L.; Ernster, Alayna; Yacoubi, Basma El; Humbert, Ianessa A.; Christou, Evangelos A.

doi:10.1016/j.humov.2018.01.002

Cited by 14 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If the reduced sensitivity hypothesis is correct for explaining the patterns we see in the SLN lesioned animals, then either controlling bolus volume directly through regulated feeding, or increasing sensitivity of the valleculae by using other stimuli in conjunction with volume [i.e., capsaicin (31,32)] are likely to be most effective for restoring normal swallow function. In the case of RLN lesion, however, restoring something like normal function is likely to involve interventions that harness sensory motor mechanisms that establish coordination between tongue and pharyngeal components of swallowing, such as entrained milk delivery (28) or motor learning (33)(34)(35).…”

Section: Despite Both Resulting In Increased Aspiration Rln and Sln mentioning

confidence: 99%

Specific Vagus Nerve Lesion Have Distinctive Physiologic Mechanisms of Dysphagia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Swallowing is complex at anatomical, functional, and neurological levels. The connections among these levels are poorly understood, yet they underpin mechanisms of swallowing pathology. The complexity of swallowing physiology means that multiple failure points may exist that lead to the same clinical diagnosis (e.g., aspiration). The superior laryngeal nerve (SLN) and the recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) are branches of the vagus that innervate different structures involved in swallowing. Although they have distinct sensory fields, lesion of either nerve is associated clinically with increased aspiration. We tested the hypothesis that despite increased aspiration in both case, oropharyngeal kinematic changes and their relationship to aspiration would be different in RLN and SLN lesioned infant pigs. We compared movements of the tongue and epiglottis in swallows before and after either RLN or SLN lesion. We rated swallows for airway protection. Posterior tongue ratio of safe swallows changed in RLN (p = 0.01) but not SLN lesioned animals. Unsafe swallows post lesion had different posterior tongue ratios in RLN and SLN lesioned animals. Duration of epiglottal inversion shortened after lesion in SLN animals (p = 0.02) but remained unchanged in RLN animals. Thus, although SLN and RLN lesion lead to the same clinical outcome (increased aspiration), the mechanisms of failure of airway protection are different, which suggests that effective therapies may be different with each injury. Understanding the specific pathophysiology of swallowing associated with specific neural insults will help develop targeted, disease appropriate treatments.

show abstract

Section: Despite Both Resulting In Increased Aspiration Rln and Sln mentioning

confidence: 99%

Specific Vagus Nerve Lesion Have Distinctive Physiologic Mechanisms of Dysphagia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The underlying reason for superior efficacy of electrotactile training to visual training on tongue motor learning is unclear and should be further investigated. It is perhaps because of the neural pathway, as tongue muscles are controlled via the corticobulbar pathway and tactile feedback shares the same pathway, while visual feedback works well for training the limb muscles controlled via the corticospinal pathway [27]. We also speculate that the error-augmented feature of the electrotactile training may have contributed to the enhanced motor training, as the electrical stimulation applied onto the tongue may have provided stronger error signal than visual display [53].…”

Section: The Underlying Reason For Effective Electrotactile Training ...mentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Tongue motor tasks are not visually guided in its intrinsic form as the tongue is hidden inside the mouth, therefore it is apparent that tongue motor learning happens without visual feedback for most of the cases. Research on spinal neural pathways also showed that visual feedback is more effective for training the limb muscles than the tongue muscles, as limb muscles are controlled via the corticospinal pathway while tongue muscles are controlled via the corticobulbar pathway [27]. One prior study showed that visual feedback does not improve the control accuracy of the tongue muscle, based on the assessment of the repeated tongue-lifting task [28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Palatal Electrotactile Display Outperforms Visual Display in Tongue Motor Learning

Jiang

Kim

Park

2022

IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Incomplete tongue motor control is a common yet challenging issue among individuals with neurotraumas and neurological disorders. In development of the training protocols, multiple sensory modalities including visual, auditory, and tactile feedback have been employed. However, the effectiveness of each sensory modality in tongue motor learning is still in question. The object of this study was to test the effectiveness of visual and electrotactile assistance on tongue motor learning, respectively. Eight healthy subjects performed the tongue pointing task, in which they were visually instructed to touch the target on the palate by their tongue tip as accurately as possible. Each subject wore a custom-made dental retainer with 12 electrodes distributed over the palatal area. For visual training, 3×4 LED array on the computer screen, corresponding to the electrode layout, was turned on with different colors according to the tongue contact. For electrotactile training, electrical stimulation was applied to the tongue with frequencies depending on the distance between the tongue contact and the target, along with a small protrusion on the retainer as an indicator of the target. One baseline session, one training session, and three post-training sessions were conducted over four-day duration. Experimental result showed that the error was decreased after both visual and electrotactile trainings, from 3.56±0.11 (Mean±STE) to 1.27±0.16, and from 3.97±0.11 to 0.53±0.19, respectively. The result also showed that electrotactile training leads to stronger retention than visual training, as the improvement was retained as 62.68±1.81% after electrotactile training and 36.59±2.24% after visual training, at 3-day post training.

show abstract

“…Experimental studies have shown that incomplete or delayed external sensory feedback is important for learning 45,53,54 . Our model proposes that the cerebellum plays an important role in facilitating motor learning when in the presence of incomplete or delayed feedback.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebro-cerebellar networks facilitate learning through feedback decoupling

Boven

Pemberton

Chadderton

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioural feedback is critical for learning in the cerebral cortex. However, such feedback is often not readily available. How the cerebral cortex learns efficiently despite the sparse nature of feedback remains unclear. Inspired by recent deep learning algorithms, we introduce a systems-level computational model of cerebro-cerebellar interactions. In this model a cerebral recurrent network receives feedback predictions from a cerebellar network, thereby decoupling learning in cerebral networks from future feedback. When trained in a simple sensorimotor task the model shows faster learning and reduced dysmetria-like behaviours, in line with the widely observed functional impact of the cerebellum. Next, we demonstrate that these results generalise to more complex motor and cognitive tasks. Finally, the model makes several experimentally testable predictions regarding (1) cerebro-cerebellar task-specific representations over learning, (2) task-specific benefits of cerebellar predictions and (3) the differential impact of cerebellar and inferior olive lesions. Overall, our work offers a theoretical framework of cerebro-cerebellar networks as feedback decoupling machines.

show abstract

Integration of visual feedback and motor learning: Corticospinal vs. corticobulbar pathway

Cited by 14 publications

References 38 publications

Specific Vagus Nerve Lesion Have Distinctive Physiologic Mechanisms of Dysphagia

Specific Vagus Nerve Lesion Have Distinctive Physiologic Mechanisms of Dysphagia

Palatal Electrotactile Display Outperforms Visual Display in Tongue Motor Learning

Cerebro-cerebellar networks facilitate learning through feedback decoupling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About