4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Afferent control of locomotor CPG: insights from a simple neuromechanical model

Journal

NEURONS AND NETWORKS IN THE SPINAL CORD
Volume 1198, Issue -, Pages 21-34

Publisher

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05435.x

Keywords

locomotion; central pattern generator; afferent control; spinal cord injury; recovery of locomotor function; modeling

Funding

  1. NINDS/NIH [R01 NS048844]
  2. NIH [P01 NS055976, P01 HD032571]
  3. EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT [P01HD032571] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  4. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE [R01NS048844, P01NS055976] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A simple neuromechanical model has been developed that describes a spinal central pattern generator (CPG) controlling the locomotor movement of a single-joint limb via activation of two antagonist (flexor and extensor) muscles. The limb performs rhythmic movements under control of the muscular, gravitational and ground reaction forces. Muscle afferents provide length-dependent (types Ia and II) and force-dependent (type Ib from the extensor) feedback to the CPG. We show that afferent feedback adjusts CPG operation to the kinematics and dynamics of the limb providing stable locomotion. Increasing the supraspinal drive to the CPG increases locomotion speed by reducing the duration of stance phase. We show that such asymmetric, extensor-dominated control of locomotor speed (with relatively constant swing duration) is provided by afferent feedback independent of the asymmetric rhythmic pattern generated by the CPG alone (in fictive locomotion conditions). Finally, we demonstrate the possibility of reestablishing stable locomotion after removal of the supraspinal drive (associated with spinal cord injury) by increasing the weights of afferent inputs to the CPG, which is thought to occur following locomotor training.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available