Mouse incising central pattern generator: Characteristics and modulation by pain

Widmer, Charles G.; Morris-Wiman, Joyce

doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2018.08.012

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This feedback from the oral cavity to the brain creates a loop that modulates force, energy, speed, and so on required to masticate and form a bolus (Lund, Kolta, Westberg, & Scot, ; van der Glas, van der Bilt, Abbink, Mason, & Cadden, ). The action of chewing is controlled by a central pattern generator located in the brainstem, modulating peak amplitudes, force loads, and rhythmic movements (Avivi‐Arber, Martin, Lee, & Sessle, ; Lund et al, ; Widmer & Morris‐Wiman, ). Furthermore, people eat differently and have different mechanism for chewing, resulting in notable differences between consumers making it difficult to collect and compare behavior results (Braxton, Dauchel, & Brown, ; Hiiemae, ; Lassauzay, Peyron, Albuisson, Dransfield, & Woda, ; Woda, Foster, Mishellany, & Peyron, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…movements (Avivi-Arber, Martin, Lee, & Sessle, 2011;Lund et al, 1998;Widmer & Morris-Wiman, 2018). Furthermore, people eat differently and have different mechanism for chewing, resulting in notable differences between consumers making it difficult to collect and compare behavior results (Braxton, Dauchel, & Brown, 1996;Hiiemae, 2004;Lassauzay, Peyron, Albuisson, Dransfield, & Woda, 2000;Woda, Foster, Mishellany, & Peyron, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The effect of oral tactile sensitivity on texture perception and mastication behavior

Shupe

Wilson

Luckett

2019

Journal of Texture Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mastication is a notable source of interindividual variation in texture perception and could be linked to oral tactile sensitivity. To better understand the influence of oral tactile sensitivity on mastication behavior, this study measured masticatory behavior and texture discrimination in participants of high (n = 20) and low (n = 21) oral tactile sensitivity. Overall, there was no significant difference between high and low sensitivity participants in their ability to distinguish texture changes (p = .486). However, there were significant differences found between the groups based on their masticatory behaviors including chewing pattern and overall number of chewing cycles. Additionally, those in the high sensitivity group used more stochastic chewing movements, while those in the low sensitivity group were found to use crescent‐shaped chewing cycles. It was also noted that in the high sensitivity group, the jaw moved further distances in all phases and moved at a higher velocity when opening but not when closing, when compared to the low sensitivity group. These results show what particular aspects of mastication are most influenced by oral tactile feedback. Chewing patterns have been shown to influence texture and flavor perception, as well as energy intake. However, much of the person‐to‐person variability in chewing patters comes from unknown sources. This study shows which chewing behaviors are different between a group of individuals with high oral tactile sensitivity and another with low oral tactile sensitivity. These findings highlight the manner in which tactile feedback from the mouth influences chewing.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The effect of oral tactile sensitivity on texture perception and mastication behavior

Shupe

Wilson

Luckett

2019

Journal of Texture Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lampreys have an operational brain with effectively no vestibulo-or corpus cerebellum. They have an operational VOR, but no evidence of active gain control equivalent to the that found in other vertebrates (Wibble et al 2022). As previously said, the advent of cerebellar structures in elasmobranchs, as an additional network overlying a pre-existing functional brain, qualifies as subsumption architecture.…”

Section: Cerebellum Examples Relevant To Cpg/ Cerebellar Interactionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Roles for cerebellum and subsumption architecture in central pattern generation

Montgomery

2023

J Comp Physiol A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within vertebrates, central pattern generators drive rhythmical behaviours, such as locomotion and ventilation. Their pattern generation is also influenced by sensory input and various forms of neuromodulation. These capabilities arose early in vertebrate evolution, preceding the evolution of the cerebellum in jawed vertebrates. This later evolution of the cerebellum is suggestive of subsumption architecture that adds functionality to a pre-existing network. From a central-pattern-generator perspective, what additional functionality might the cerebellum provide? The suggestion is that the adaptive filter capabilities of the cerebellum may be able to use error learning to appropriately repurpose pattern output. Examples may include head and eye stabilization during locomotion, song learning, and context-dependent alternation between learnt motor-control sequences.

show abstract

“…required to properly masticate and form a bolus (Lund, Kolta, Westberg, & Scot, 1998;van der Glas, van der Bilt, Abbink, Mason, & Cadden, 2007). The action of chewing is controlled by a central pattern generator located in the brainstem, modulating peak amplitudes, force loads and rhythmic movements (Avivi-Arber, Martin, Lee, & Sessle, 2011;Lund et al, 1998;Widmer & Morris-Wiman, 2018). Furthermore, people eat differently and have different mechanism for chewing, resulting in notable differences between consumers making it difficult to collect and compare behavior results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Oral Tactile Sensitivity on Texture Perception and Mastication Behavior in Humans

Shupe

Wilson

Luckett

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mastication behavior is a notable source of interindividual variation in texture perception and could be linked to oral sensitivity. As oral sensitivity declines so does the amount of tactile feedback relayed to the brain, resulting in less effective manipulation or food and a reduced ability to discriminate differences. To address these hypotheses, we measured masticatory behavior and related this to texture discrimination and oral sensitivity. The study was performed on 41 participants in two groups, , with high (n = 20) or low (n=21) sensitivity. Oral sensitivity was measured using a battery of tests that included: oral stereognosis, lingual tactile acuity, and bite force sensitivity. Sensitivity to texture changes was measured using a series of triangle tests with confectionaries of different hardness, with masticatory patterns and behaviors being video recorded and analyzed using jaw tracking software. Overall, there was no significant difference between high and low sensitivity participants and their ability to distinguish texture changes.But, there were significantly different trends found between the groups based on their masticatory behaviors including chewing pattern and overall number of chews. But, it was found that multiple masticatory behaviors were being modulated by oral sensitivity, including overall chewing cycles used (p < 0.0001). More, specifically those in the high sensitivity group used more stochastic chewing movements, while those in the low sensitivity group were found to use crescent-shaped chewing cycles. It was also noted that in the high sensitivity group the jaw moved further distances (p < 0.0001) in all phases and moved at a higher velocity when opening (p < 0.0001) but not when closing, when compared to the low sensitivity group. These results help bolster evidence that mastication and oral sensitivity are related.

show abstract

Mouse incising central pattern generator: Characteristics and modulation by pain

Cited by 5 publications

References 48 publications

The effect of oral tactile sensitivity on texture perception and mastication behavior

The effect of oral tactile sensitivity on texture perception and mastication behavior

Roles for cerebellum and subsumption architecture in central pattern generation

The Effect of Oral Tactile Sensitivity on Texture Perception and Mastication Behavior in Humans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About