Corticospinal excitability of the biceps brachii is higher during arm cycling than an intensity-matched tonic contraction

• Published in: Journal of neurophysiology 2014-09, Vol.112 (5), p.1142-1151
• Main Authors: Forman, Davis, Raj, Amita, Button, Duane C, Power, Kevin E
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Arm - innervation; Arm - physiology; Electromyography; Evoked Potentials, Motor; Humans; Male; Motor Activity; Motor Cortex - physiology; Motor Neurons - physiology; Muscle Contraction; Muscle, Skeletal - innervation; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology; Pyramidal Tracts - physiology; Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation; Young Adult
• ISSN: 0022-3077; 1522-1598
• DOI: 10.1152/jn.00210.2014

Human studies have not assessed corticospinal excitability of an upper-limb prime mover during arm cycling. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether supraspinal and/or spinal motoneuron excitability of the biceps brachii was different between arm cycling and an intensity-matched tonic contraction. We hypothesized that spinal motoneuron excitability would be higher during arm cycling than an intensity-matched tonic contraction. Supraspinal and spinal motoneuron excitability were assessed using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the motor cortex and transmastoid electrical stimulation (TMES) of the corticospinal tract, respectively. TMS-induced motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) and TMES-induced cervicomedullary-evoked potentials (CMEPs) were assessed at three separate positions (3, 6, and 12 o'clock relative to a clock face) during arm cycling and an intensity-matched tonic contraction. MEP amplitudes were 7.2 and 8.8% maximum amplitude of the compound muscle action potential (Mmax) larger during arm cycling compared with a tonic contraction at the 3 (P < 0.001) and 6 o'clock (P < 0.001) positions, respectively. There was no difference between tasks during elbow extension (12 o'clock). CMEP amplitudes were 5.2% Mmax larger during arm cycling compared with a tonic contraction at the 3 o'clock position (P < 0.001) with no differences seen at midflexion (6 o'clock) or extension (12 o'clock). The data indicate an increase in the excitability of corticospinal neurons, which ultimately project to biceps brachii during the elbow flexion portion of arm cycling, and increased spinal motoneuron excitability at the onset of elbow flexion during arm cycling. We conclude that supraspinal and spinal motoneuron excitability are phase- and task-dependent.