François Dernoncourt, Simon Avrillon, Tijn Logtens, Thomas Cattagni, Dario Farina, François Hug
{"title":"Flexible control of motor units: is the multidimensionality of motor unit manifolds a sufficient condition?","authors":"François Dernoncourt, Simon Avrillon, Tijn Logtens, Thomas Cattagni, Dario Farina, François Hug","doi":"10.1113/JP287857","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Understanding flexibility in the neural control of movement requires identifying the distribution of common inputs to the motor units. In this study, we identified large samples of motor units from two lower limb muscles: the vastus lateralis (VL; up to 60 motor units per participant) and the gastrocnemius medialis (GM; up to 67 motor units per participant). First, we applied a linear dimensionality reduction method to assess the dimensionality of the manifolds underlying the motor unit activity. We subsequently investigated the flexibility in motor unit control under two conditions: sinusoidal contractions with torque feedback, and online control with visual feedback on motor unit firing rates. Overall, we found that the activity of GM motor units was effectively captured by a single latent factor defining a unidimensional manifold, whereas the VL motor units were better represented by three latent factors defining a multidimensional manifold. Despite this difference in dimensionality, the recruitment of motor units in the two muscles exhibited similarly low levels of flexibility. Using a spiking network model, we tested the hypothesis that dimensionality derived from factorization does not solely represent descending cortical commands but is also influenced by spinal circuitry. We demonstrated that a heterogeneous distribution of inputs to motor units, or specific configurations of recurrent inhibitory circuits, could produce a multidimensional manifold. This study clarifies an important debated issue, demonstrating that while motor unit firings of a non-compartmentalized muscle can lie in a multidimensional manifold, the CNS may still have limited capacity for flexible control of these units. KEY POINTS: To generate movement, the CNS distributes both excitatory and inhibitory inputs to the motor units. The level of flexibility in the neural control of these motor units remains a topic of debate with significant implications for identifying the smallest unit of movement control. By combining experimental data and in silico models, we demonstrated that the activity of a large sample of motor units from a single muscle can be represented by a multidimensional linear manifold; however, these units show very limited flexibility in their recruitment. The dimensionality of the linear manifold may not directly reflect the dimensionality of descending inputs but could instead relate to the organization of local spinal circuits.</p>","PeriodicalId":50088,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physiology-London","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physiology-London","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1113/JP287857","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Understanding flexibility in the neural control of movement requires identifying the distribution of common inputs to the motor units. In this study, we identified large samples of motor units from two lower limb muscles: the vastus lateralis (VL; up to 60 motor units per participant) and the gastrocnemius medialis (GM; up to 67 motor units per participant). First, we applied a linear dimensionality reduction method to assess the dimensionality of the manifolds underlying the motor unit activity. We subsequently investigated the flexibility in motor unit control under two conditions: sinusoidal contractions with torque feedback, and online control with visual feedback on motor unit firing rates. Overall, we found that the activity of GM motor units was effectively captured by a single latent factor defining a unidimensional manifold, whereas the VL motor units were better represented by three latent factors defining a multidimensional manifold. Despite this difference in dimensionality, the recruitment of motor units in the two muscles exhibited similarly low levels of flexibility. Using a spiking network model, we tested the hypothesis that dimensionality derived from factorization does not solely represent descending cortical commands but is also influenced by spinal circuitry. We demonstrated that a heterogeneous distribution of inputs to motor units, or specific configurations of recurrent inhibitory circuits, could produce a multidimensional manifold. This study clarifies an important debated issue, demonstrating that while motor unit firings of a non-compartmentalized muscle can lie in a multidimensional manifold, the CNS may still have limited capacity for flexible control of these units. KEY POINTS: To generate movement, the CNS distributes both excitatory and inhibitory inputs to the motor units. The level of flexibility in the neural control of these motor units remains a topic of debate with significant implications for identifying the smallest unit of movement control. By combining experimental data and in silico models, we demonstrated that the activity of a large sample of motor units from a single muscle can be represented by a multidimensional linear manifold; however, these units show very limited flexibility in their recruitment. The dimensionality of the linear manifold may not directly reflect the dimensionality of descending inputs but could instead relate to the organization of local spinal circuits.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Physiology publishes full-length original Research Papers and Techniques for Physiology, which are short papers aimed at disseminating new techniques for physiological research. Articles solicited by the Editorial Board include Perspectives, Symposium Reports and Topical Reviews, which highlight areas of special physiological interest. CrossTalk articles are short editorial-style invited articles framing a debate between experts in the field on controversial topics. Letters to the Editor and Journal Club articles are also published. All categories of papers are subjected to peer reivew.
The Journal of Physiology welcomes submitted research papers in all areas of physiology. Authors should present original work that illustrates new physiological principles or mechanisms. Papers on work at the molecular level, at the level of the cell membrane, single cells, tissues or organs and on systems physiology are all acceptable. Theoretical papers and papers that use computational models to further our understanding of physiological processes will be considered if based on experimentally derived data and if the hypothesis advanced is directly amenable to experimental testing. While emphasis is on human and mammalian physiology, work on lower vertebrate or invertebrate preparations may be suitable if it furthers the understanding of the functioning of other organisms including mammals.