Proactive modulation of long-interval intracortical inhibition during response inhibition

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

Proactive modulation of long-interval intracortical inhibition during response inhibition. / MacDonald, Hayley; Cowie, Matthew J.; Cirillo, John; Byblow, Winston D.

In: Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol. 116, No. 2, 01.08.2016, p. 859-867.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

MacDonald, Hayley ; Cowie, Matthew J. ; Cirillo, John ; Byblow, Winston D. / Proactive modulation of long-interval intracortical inhibition during response inhibition. In: Journal of Neurophysiology. 2016 ; Vol. 116, No. 2. pp. 859-867.

Bibtex

@article{af66bbcc393e465ca9d44f3b059f7325,
title = "Proactive modulation of long-interval intracortical inhibition during response inhibition",
abstract = "Daily activities often require sudden cancellation of preplanned movement, termed response inhibition. When only a subcomponent of a whole response must be suppressed (required here on Partial trials), the ensuing component is markedly delayed. The neural mechanisms underlying partial response inhibition remain unclear. We hypothesized that Partial trials would be associated with nonselective corticomotor suppression and that GABAB receptor-mediated inhibition within primary motor cortex might be responsible for the nonselective corticomotor suppression contributing to Partial trial response delays. Sixteen right-handed participants performed a bimanual anticipatory response inhibition task while single- and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered to elicit motor evoked potentials in the left first dorsal interosseous muscle. Lift times, amplitude of motor evoked potentials, and long-interval intracortical inhibition were examined across the different trial types (Go, Stop-Left, Stop-Right, Stop-Both). Go trials produced a tight distribution of lift times around the target, whereas those during Partial trials (Stop-Left and Stop-Right) were substantially delayed. The modulation of motor evoked potential amplitude during Stop-Right trials reflected anticipation, suppression, and subsequent reinitiation of movement. Importantly, suppression was present across all Stop trial types, indicative of a {"}default{"} nonselective inhibitory process. Compared with blocks containing only Go trials, inhibition increased when Stop trials were introduced but did not differ between trial types. The amount of inhibition was positively correlated with lift times during Stop-Right trials. Tonic levels of inhibition appear to be proactively modulated by task context and influence the speed at which unimanual responses occur after a nonselective {"}brake{"} is applied. ",
keywords = "Adolescent, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Cerebral Cortex/physiology, Electromyography, Evoked Potentials, Motor/physiology, Female, Functional Laterality, Hand/physiology, Humans, Inhibition (Psychology), Male, Middle Aged, Neural Inhibition/physiology, Psychomotor Performance/physiology, Reaction Time/physiology, Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation, Young Adult",
author = "Hayley MacDonald and Cowie, {Matthew J.} and John Cirillo and Byblow, {Winston D.}",
note = "Copyright {\textcopyright} 2016 the American Physiological Society.",
year = "2016",
month = aug,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1152/jn.00144.2016",
language = "English",
volume = "116",
pages = "859--867",
journal = "Journal of Neurophysiology",
issn = "0022-3077",
publisher = "American Physiological Society",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Proactive modulation of long-interval intracortical inhibition during response inhibition

AU - MacDonald, Hayley

AU - Cowie, Matthew J.

AU - Cirillo, John

AU - Byblow, Winston D.

N1 - Copyright © 2016 the American Physiological Society.

PY - 2016/8/1

Y1 - 2016/8/1

N2 - Daily activities often require sudden cancellation of preplanned movement, termed response inhibition. When only a subcomponent of a whole response must be suppressed (required here on Partial trials), the ensuing component is markedly delayed. The neural mechanisms underlying partial response inhibition remain unclear. We hypothesized that Partial trials would be associated with nonselective corticomotor suppression and that GABAB receptor-mediated inhibition within primary motor cortex might be responsible for the nonselective corticomotor suppression contributing to Partial trial response delays. Sixteen right-handed participants performed a bimanual anticipatory response inhibition task while single- and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered to elicit motor evoked potentials in the left first dorsal interosseous muscle. Lift times, amplitude of motor evoked potentials, and long-interval intracortical inhibition were examined across the different trial types (Go, Stop-Left, Stop-Right, Stop-Both). Go trials produced a tight distribution of lift times around the target, whereas those during Partial trials (Stop-Left and Stop-Right) were substantially delayed. The modulation of motor evoked potential amplitude during Stop-Right trials reflected anticipation, suppression, and subsequent reinitiation of movement. Importantly, suppression was present across all Stop trial types, indicative of a "default" nonselective inhibitory process. Compared with blocks containing only Go trials, inhibition increased when Stop trials were introduced but did not differ between trial types. The amount of inhibition was positively correlated with lift times during Stop-Right trials. Tonic levels of inhibition appear to be proactively modulated by task context and influence the speed at which unimanual responses occur after a nonselective "brake" is applied.

AB - Daily activities often require sudden cancellation of preplanned movement, termed response inhibition. When only a subcomponent of a whole response must be suppressed (required here on Partial trials), the ensuing component is markedly delayed. The neural mechanisms underlying partial response inhibition remain unclear. We hypothesized that Partial trials would be associated with nonselective corticomotor suppression and that GABAB receptor-mediated inhibition within primary motor cortex might be responsible for the nonselective corticomotor suppression contributing to Partial trial response delays. Sixteen right-handed participants performed a bimanual anticipatory response inhibition task while single- and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered to elicit motor evoked potentials in the left first dorsal interosseous muscle. Lift times, amplitude of motor evoked potentials, and long-interval intracortical inhibition were examined across the different trial types (Go, Stop-Left, Stop-Right, Stop-Both). Go trials produced a tight distribution of lift times around the target, whereas those during Partial trials (Stop-Left and Stop-Right) were substantially delayed. The modulation of motor evoked potential amplitude during Stop-Right trials reflected anticipation, suppression, and subsequent reinitiation of movement. Importantly, suppression was present across all Stop trial types, indicative of a "default" nonselective inhibitory process. Compared with blocks containing only Go trials, inhibition increased when Stop trials were introduced but did not differ between trial types. The amount of inhibition was positively correlated with lift times during Stop-Right trials. Tonic levels of inhibition appear to be proactively modulated by task context and influence the speed at which unimanual responses occur after a nonselective "brake" is applied.

KW - Adolescent

KW - Adult

KW - Analysis of Variance

KW - Cerebral Cortex/physiology

KW - Electromyography

KW - Evoked Potentials, Motor/physiology

KW - Female

KW - Functional Laterality

KW - Hand/physiology

KW - Humans

KW - Inhibition (Psychology)

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Neural Inhibition/physiology

KW - Psychomotor Performance/physiology

KW - Reaction Time/physiology

KW - Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation

KW - Young Adult

U2 - 10.1152/jn.00144.2016

DO - 10.1152/jn.00144.2016

M3 - Article

C2 - 27281744

VL - 116

SP - 859

EP - 867

JO - Journal of Neurophysiology

JF - Journal of Neurophysiology

SN - 0022-3077

IS - 2

ER -