Motor and parietal cortical areas both underlie kinaesthesia

Romaiguère, Patricia; Anton, Jean-Luc; Roth, Muriel; Casini, Laurence; Roll, Jean-Pierre

doi:10.1016/s0926-6410(02)00221-5

Cited by 114 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In a previous study (Goble et al, 2011), ankle proprioceptive brain mapping was performed on young and older participants using an established procedure involving tendon vibration in an fMRI scanner (Romaiguère et al, 2003;Naito et al, 2005Naito et al, , 2007Kavounoudias et al, 2008). The set-up for this task consisted of participants being placed head-first and supine into an fMRI scanner with arms resting comfortably at the sides of their body.…”

Section: Proprioceptive Brain Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain Activity during Ankle Proprioceptive Stimulation Predicts Balance Performance in Young and Older Adults

Goble¹,

Coxon²,

Impe³

et al. 2011

J. Neurosci.

175

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proprioceptive information from the foot/ankle provides important information regarding body sway for balance control, especially in situations where visual information is degraded or absent. Given known increases in catastrophic injury due to falls with older age, understanding the neural basis of proprioceptive processing for balance control is particularly important for older adults. In the present study, we linked neural activity in response to stimulation of key foot proprioceptors (i.e., muscle spindles) with balance ability across the lifespan. Twenty young and 20 older human adults underwent proprioceptive mapping; foot tendon vibration was compared with vibration of a nearby bone in an fMRI environment to determine regions of the brain that were active in response to muscle spindle stimulation. Several body sway metrics were also calculated for the same participants on an eyes-closed balance task. Based on regression analyses, multiple clusters of voxels were identified showing a significant relationship between muscle spindle stimulation-induced neural activity and maximum center of pressure excursion in the anterior-posterior direction. In this case, increased activation was associated with greater balance performance in parietal, frontal, and insular cortical areas, as well as structures within the basal ganglia. These correlated regions were age-and foot-stimulation side-independent and largely localized to right-sided areas of the brain thought to be involved in monitoring stimulus-driven shifts of attention. These findings support the notion that, beyond fundamental peripheral reflex mechanisms, central processing of proprioceptive signals from the foot is critical for balance control.

show abstract

Section: Proprioceptive Brain Mappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain Activity during Ankle Proprioceptive Stimulation Predicts Balance Performance in Young and Older Adults

Goble¹,

Coxon²,

Impe³

et al. 2011

J. Neurosci.

175

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These kinesthetic illusions, like kinesthetic motor images, affect the patterns of corticospinal excitability (Kito et al, 2006;Mercier et al, 2008) and, depending on the behavioral context, can evoke motor activities of cortical or reflex origin (Hagbarth and Eklund, 1966;Roll et al, 1980;Calvin-Figuière et al, 1999. Both types of kinesthetic images also activate practically the same large neural network, including sensory areas (Porro et al, 1996;Gerardin et al, 2000;Romaiguère et al, 2003;Duclos et al, 2007), cortical motor areas and the cerebellum , and parietal regions (Sirigu et al, 1996;Romaiguère et al, 2003). The same neural ensembles may therefore generate kinesthetic sensations in response to either the proprioceptive inputs themselves or the motor command and its associated efferent copy (Von Holst, 1954).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceptual Integration of Illusory and Imagined Kinesthetic Images

Thyrion¹,

Roll²

2009

Journal of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is generally agreed that motor imagery involves kinesthetic sensations especially as far as first-person imagery is concerned. It was proposed to determine the extent to which motor imagery and vibration-induced illusory sensations of movement are integrated perceptually. Imagined and illusory hand movements were evoked both separately and in various combinations in 12 volunteers. After each trial, the participants were asked to draw the movement trajectory perceived. In all the subjects, propriomimetic vibration patterns applied to various wrist muscles induced spatially oriented or more complex illusory hand movements such as writing or drawing. Depending on the instructions, the subjects were also able to produce imagined hand movements in various directions and at two different velocities. When straight illusory and imagined movements were evoked simultaneously, all the subjects perceived a single movement trajectory, in which the direction and the velocity of the two ongoing sensations were exactly integrated. This perceptual integration also occurred in the case of more complex movements, such as writing and drawing, giving rise to the perception of original trajectories also combining the features of both motor images. Because these two kinesthetic images, the one intentionally and centrally induced and the other peripherally evoked, activate almost the same neural network including cortical sensory and motor areas, parietal regions, and the cerebellum, these results suggest that common processes may be involved in such a perceptual fusion. The nature of these common processes is discussed, and some fields of research in which these findings could potentially be applied are suggested.

show abstract

“…Also, a movement illusion, evoked by muscular vibration (without any associated movement), evokes an activity in M1 (Casini et al, 2006). Morover, the increase of the BOLD level in M1 during the illusion is correlated with the force of the illusion (Romaiguère et al, 2003). Longcamp and colleagues (2006) found M1 to be implicated in passive reading of hand written texts.…”

Section: M1 Activity Without Motor Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%