Main article
Recurrent inhibition of firing motoneurones in man

https://doi.org/10.1016/0013-4694(88)90213-1Get rights and content

Abstract

The effects of antidromic stimulation of large motoneurones on firing small motoneurones of soleus muscle have been studied. Against the background of rhythmic firing of small motor units (MUs) activated during weak voluntary muscle contraction, thick efferents of the tibialis posterior nerve were selectively stimulated and an M response was evoked in which small MUs were not involved. This provided a means of avoiding antidromic stimulation of the motoneurone under study and, thus, analysing the effect of stimulation without its summation with after-hyperpolarization. The background firing rate of MUs was 4.5–9.2/sec. PSTHs revealed a distinct inhibitory effect with a latency of 35–40 msec (slightly exceeding the latency of monosynaptic reflex) and duration 5–30 msec. It was concluded that the short-latency inhibition could be identified as recurrent inhibition. The effectiveness of recurrent inhibition evaluated by the lengthening of the interspike interval was shown to depend on the arrival time of the volley in the interval and on the background firing rate of the motoneurone. When the inhibitory volley arrived at the beginning of the interspike interval it was ineffective. This indicates that in the investigated range of firing rates the motoneurone is unable to exert an inhibitory effect on its own firing via recurrent collaterals. The inhibitory volley became highly effective at the end of an interspike interval, when the membrane potential approached threshold. The lengthening of interspike interval was more marked at a lower firing rate of the motoneurone. An increase in the background firing rate reduced the extent of recurrent inhibition (at a rate above 10/sec up to its complete ineffectiveness). Various methods for evaluating recurrent inhibition in a firing motoneurone are compared.

References (15)

  • L.P. Kudina

    Reflex effects of muscle afferents on antagonist studied on single firing motor units in man

    Electroenceph. clin. Neurophysiol.

    (1980)
  • E. Pierrot-Deseilligny et al.

    Evidence for recurrent inhibition by motoneurons in human subjects

    Brain Res.

    (1975)
  • A.K. Datta et al.

    The stimulus locked interval histogram: a method that may allow investigation of Renshaw inhibition in man

    J. Physiol. (Lond.)

    (1979)
  • J.C. Eccles et al.

    Distribution of recurrent inhibition among motoneurones

    J. Physiol. (Lond.)

    (1961)
  • P.H. Ellaway et al.

    A comparison of the recurrent inhibition of α- and γ-motoneurones in the cat

    J. Physiol. (Lond.)

    (1980)
  • E.E. Fetz et al.

    Relation between shapes of postsynaptic potentials and changes in firing probability of cat motoneurones

    J. Physiol. (Lond.)

    (1983)
  • H. Hultborn et al.

    Changes in recurrent inhibition during voluntary soleus contraction in man studied by an H-reflex technique

    J. Physiol. (Lond.)

    (1979)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (32)

  • Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis weakens spinal recurrent inhibition and post-activation depression

    2020, Clinical Neurophysiology
    Citation Excerpt :

    To study RI, we stimulated the largest diameter motor axons without evoking the H-reflex in the tibial nerve while recording from the smaller motor units. Stimulation of the motor axons antidromically activates motoneuron cell body and orthodromically activates Renshaw cells via axon collaterals which in turn inhibits firing motoneurons (Kudina and Pantseva, 1988; Özyurt et al., 2019). There is also a chance that an F-wave may also activate Renshaw cells orthodromically.

  • Atonic phenomena in focal seizures: Nomenclature, clinical findings and pathophysiological concepts

    2012, Seizure
    Citation Excerpt :

    Transcranial magnetic stimulation studies have shown to not only elicit a positive motor response (motor evoked potential; MEP), but they have shown that such stimulation can also induce a decrease in EMG activity, a phenomenon coined silent period.34–36 This inhibition is caused by spinal mechanisms in the initial phase, whereas cortical inhibitory afferent feedback contributes to the later stages of the silent period.37–40 The generator of this negative motor activity is in close vicinity to the region that produces the positive motor response and most likely overlaps to a large extent with this region.41

  • A review of the H-reflex and M-wave in the human triceps surae

    2005, Human Movement Science
    Citation Excerpt :

    Although the antidromically propagating action potential volley elicited by the electrical stimulation in the Ia afferents have no significant effect, the antidromic action potential volley in the motor axons can either collide with the orthodromic sensory (Ia) action potential in the axon or cause hyperpolarisation of the motoneuron soma (Gottlieb & Agarwal, 1976). When collision occurs between the Ia afferent orthodromic volley, and the motor nerve antidromic volley, significant reduction in the H-reflex magnitude will result (Hugon, 1973; Kudina & Pantseva, 1988). This antidromic volley can also collide with voluntarily produced action potentials and therefore reduce the output of the test muscle during the voluntary contraction (Brock, Coombs, & Eccles, 1952).

  • Recurrent inhibition in humans

    1999, Progress in Neurobiology
View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text