JN Ad Instruments
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (January 9, 2008). doi:10.1152/jn.01214.2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
99/3/1354    most recent
01214.2007v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bunday, K. L.
Right arrow Articles by Bronstein, A. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bunday, K. L.
Right arrow Articles by Bronstein, A. M.
Submitted on October 31, 2007
Accepted on January 7, 2008

VISUO-VESTIBULAR INFLUENCES ON THE MOVING PLATFORM LOCOMOTOR AFTEREFFECT

Karen Louise Bunday1 and Adolfo M. Bronstein2*

1 Academic Department of Neuro-Otology, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine, London, United Kingdom; Clinical Neurosciences, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
2 Academic Department of Neuro-Otology, Imperial College Faculty of Medicine, London, United Kingdom

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: a.bronstein{at}imperial.ac.uk.

After walking onto a moving platform subjects experience a locomotor aftereffect (LAE), including a self-generated stumble, when walking again onto a stationary platform. Thus, this LAE affords examination of the role of vestibular input during an internally generated postural challenge. The experiments involved, walking onto the stationary sled (BEFORE trials), walking onto the moving sled (MOVING) and a second set of stationary trials (AFTER). We investigated 9 bilateral labyrinthine defective subjects (LDS) and 13 age-matched normal controls (NC) with eyes-open. We repeated the experiment in 5 NC and 5 LDS but this time the AFTER trials were performed twice, first eyes-closed and then on eye re-opening. During MOVING trials, LDS were considerably unstable thus confirming the established role of the vestibular system during externally imposed postural perturbations. During AFTER trials, both groups experienced an aftereffect with eyes-open and closed, shown as higher approach gait velocity, a forward trunk overshoot and increased leg EMG. However, there were no significant group differences due to the fact that stopping the forwards trunk overshoot was accomplished by anticipatory EMG bursts. On eye re-opening the aftereffect re-emerged, significantly larger in LDS than in NC. The lack of group differences in AFTER trials suggests that when facing internally-generated postural perturbations, as in this adaptation process, the CNS relies less on vestibular feedback and more on anticipatory mechanisms. Re-emergence of the aftereffect on eye re-opening indicates the existence of a feedforward visuo-contextual mechanism for locomotor learning, which is adaptively enhanced in the absence of vestibular function.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2008 by the The American Physiological Society.