Corticospinal Excitability Is Lower During Eccentric Than Concentric Cycling in Men.

How corticospinal excitability changes during eccentric locomotor exercise is unknown. In the present study, 13 volunteers performed 30-min strenuous concentric and eccentric cycling bouts at the same power output (60% concentric peak power output). Transcranial magnetic and electrical femoral nerve stimulations were applied at exercise onset (3rd min) and end (25th min). Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) amplitude was measured for the rectus femoris (RF) and vastus lateralis (VL) muscles with surface electromyography (EMG) and expressed as a percentage of maximal M-wave amplitude (MMAX). EMG amplitude 100 ms prior to MEPs and the silent period duration were calculated. There was no change in any neural parameter during the exercises (all P > 0.24). VL and RF MMAX were unaffected by exercise modality (all P > 0.38). VL MEP amplitude was greater (26 ± 11.4 vs. 15.2 ± 7.7% MMAX; P = 0.008) during concentric than eccentric cycling whereas RF MEP amplitude was not different (24.4 ± 10.8 vs. 17.2 ± 9.8% MMAX; P = 0.051). While VL EMG was higher during concentric than eccentric cycling (P = 0.03), RF EMG showed no significant difference (P = 0.07). Similar silent period durations were found (RF: 120 ± 30 ms; VL: 114 ± 27 ms; all P > 0.61), but the silent period/MEP ratio was higher during eccentric than concentric cycling for both muscles (all P < 0.02). In conclusion, corticospinal excitability to the knee extensors is lower and relative silent period longer during eccentric than concentric cycling, yet both remained unaltered with time.

Muscle effort is best minimized by the right-dominant arm in the gravity field.

The central nervous system (CNS) develops motor strategies that minimize various hidden criteria, such as end-point variance or effort. A large body of literature suggests that the dominant (D) arm is specialized for such open-loop optimization-like processes, whereas the nondominant (ND) arm is specialized for closed-loop postural control. Building on recent results suggesting that the brain plans arm movements that take advantage of gravity effects to minimize muscle effort, the present study tests the hypothesized superiority of the dominant arm motor system for effort minimization. Thirty participants (22.5 ± 2.1 yr old; all right-handed) performed vertical arm movements between two targets (40° amplitude), in two directions (upward and downward) with their two arms (dominant and nondominant). We recorded the arm kinematics and electromyographic activities of the anterior and posterior deltoid to compare two motor signatures of the gravity-related optimization process; i.e., directional asymmetries and negative epochs on phasic muscular activity. We found that these motor signatures were still present during movements performed with the nondominant arm, indicating that the effort-minimization process also occurs for the nondominant motor system. However, these markers were reduced compared with movements performed with the dominant arm. This difference was especially prominent during downward movements, where the optimization of gravity effects occurs early in the movement. Assuming that the dominant arm is optimal to minimize muscle effort, as demonstrated by previous studies, the present results support the hypothesized superiority of the dominant arm motor system for effort minimization.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The hypothesis of hemispheric specialization for feedforward and feedback control has been developed and is still debated. Here, taking advantage of recent knowledge on optimal planning and control of arm movements in the gravity field, we recorded kinematics and electromyographic activities during vertical arm movements performed with the dominant and nondominant arms. Our results reveal that the nondominant arm takes advantage of gravity effects to minimize muscle effort, but less than the dominant arm.

Deterioration, Compensation and Motor Control Processes in Healthy Aging, Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer's Disease.

Aging is associated with modifications of several brain structures and functions. These modifications then manifest as modified behaviors. It has been proposed that some brain function modifications may compensate for some other deteriorated ones, thus maintaining behavioral performance. Through the concept of compensation versus deterioration, this article reviews the literature on motor function in healthy and pathological aging. We first highlight mechanistic studies that used paradigms, allowing us to identify precise compensation mechanisms in healthy aging. Subsequently, we review studies investigating motor function in two often-associated neurological conditions, i.e., mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease. We point out the need to expand the knowledge gained from descriptive studies with studies targeting specific motor control processes. Teasing apart deteriorated versus compensating processes represents precious knowledge that could significantly improve the prevention and rehabilitation of age-related loss of mobility.

Motor Planning of Vertical Arm Movements in Healthy Older Adults: Does Effort Minimization Persist With Aging?

Several sensorimotor modifications are known to occur with aging, possibly leading to adverse outcomes such as falls. Recently, some of those modifications have been proposed to emerge from motor planning deteriorations. Motor planning of vertical movements is thought to engage an internal model of gravity to anticipate its mechanical effects on the body-limbs and thus to genuinely produce movements that minimize muscle effort. This is supported, amongst other results, by direction-dependent kinematics where relative durations to peak accelerations and peak velocity are shorter for upward than for downward movements. The present study compares the motor planning of fast and slow vertical arm reaching movements between 18 young (24 ± 3 years old) and 17 older adults (70 ± 5 years old). We found that older participants still exhibit strong directional asymmetries (i.e., differences between upward and downward movements), indicating that optimization processes during motor planning persist with healthy aging. However, the size of these differences was increased in older participants, indicating that gravity-related motor planning changes with age. We discuss this increase as the possible result of an overestimation of gravity torque or increased weight of the effort cost in the optimization process. Overall, these results support the hypothesis that feedforward processes and, more precisely, optimal motor planning, remain active with healthy aging.