Abstract

Within the cervical and lumbar spinal enlargements, central pattern generating (CPG) circuitry produces the rhythmic output necessary for limb coordination during locomotion. Long propriospinal neurons that inter-connect these CPGs are thought to secure hindlimb-forelimb coordination, ensuring that diagonal limb pairs move synchronously while the ipsilateral limb pairs move out-of-phase during stepping. Here, we show that silencing long ascending propriospinal neurons (LAPNs) that interconnect the lumbar and cervical CPGs disrupts left-right limb coupling of each limb pair in the adult rat during overground locomotion on a high-friction surface. These perturbations occurred independent of the locomotor rhythm, intralimb coordination, and speed-dependent (or any other) principal features of locomotion. Strikingly, the functional consequences of silencing LAPNs are highly context-dependent; the phenotype was not expressed during swimming, treadmill stepping, exploratory locomotion, or walking on an uncoated, slick surface. These data reveal surprising flexibility and context-dependence in the control of interlimb coordination during locomotion.

Data availability

Source data has been provided for: Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5, Figure 1 figure supplement 1 and Figure 4 figure supplement 2

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Amanda M Pocratsky

    Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Courtney T Shepard

    Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Johnny R Morehouse

    Neurological Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Darlene A Burke

    Neurological Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Amberley S Riegler

    Neurological Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Josiah T Hardin

    J B Speed School of Engineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jason E Beare

    Neurological Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3988-1223
  8. Casey Hainline

    Neurological Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Gregory JR States

    Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Brandon L Brown

    Neurological Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Scott R Whittemore

    Neurological Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. David SK Magnuson

    Neurological Surgery and Anatomical Sciences and Neurobiology, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    For correspondence
    dsmagn01@louisville.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3816-3676

Funding

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01 NS089324)

  • Scott R Whittemore
  • David SK Magnuson

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P30 GM103507)

  • Scott R Whittemore
  • David SK Magnuson

Kentucky Spinal Cord and Head Injury Research Trust (13-14)

  • Scott R Whittemore
  • David SK Magnuson

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All of the animals were handled according to the approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) protocol (#16669) of the University of Louisville. All surgery was performed under sodium pentobarbital or isoflurane anesthesia, and every effort was made to minimize suffering.

Copyright

© 2020, Pocratsky et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 1,979
    views
  • 310
    downloads
  • 33
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Amanda M Pocratsky
  2. Courtney T Shepard
  3. Johnny R Morehouse
  4. Darlene A Burke
  5. Amberley S Riegler
  6. Josiah T Hardin
  7. Jason E Beare
  8. Casey Hainline
  9. Gregory JR States
  10. Brandon L Brown
  11. Scott R Whittemore
  12. David SK Magnuson
(2020)
Long ascending propriospinal neurons provide flexible, context-specific control of interlimb coordination
eLife 9:e53565.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.53565

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.53565

Further reading

    1. Neuroscience
    Lisa Reisinger, Gianpaolo Demarchi ... Nathan Weisz
    Research Article

    Phantom perceptions like tinnitus occur without any identifiable environmental or bodily source. The mechanisms and key drivers behind tinnitus are poorly understood. The dominant framework, suggesting that tinnitus results from neural hyperactivity in the auditory pathway following hearing damage, has been difficult to investigate in humans and has reached explanatory limits. As a result, researchers have tried to explain perceptual and potential neural aberrations in tinnitus within a more parsimonious predictive-coding framework. In two independent magnetoencephalography studies, participants passively listened to sequences of pure tones with varying levels of regularity (i.e. predictability) ranging from random to ordered. Aside from being a replication of the first study, the pre-registered second study, including 80 participants, ensured rigorous matching of hearing status, as well as age, sex, and hearing loss, between individuals with and without tinnitus. Despite some changes in the details of the paradigm, both studies equivalently reveal a group difference in neural representation, based on multivariate pattern analysis, of upcoming stimuli before their onset. These data strongly suggest that individuals with tinnitus engage anticipatory auditory predictions differently to controls. While the observation of different predictive processes is robust and replicable, the precise neurocognitive mechanism underlying it calls for further, ideally longitudinal, studies to establish its role as a potential contributor to, and/or consequence of, tinnitus.

    1. Neuroscience
    Sam E Benezra, Kripa B Patel ... Randy M Bruno
    Research Article

    Learning alters cortical representations and improves perception. Apical tuft dendrites in cortical layer 1, which are unique in their connectivity and biophysical properties, may be a key site of learning-induced plasticity. We used both two-photon and SCAPE microscopy to longitudinally track tuft-wide calcium spikes in apical dendrites of layer 5 pyramidal neurons in barrel cortex as mice learned a tactile behavior. Mice were trained to discriminate two orthogonal directions of whisker stimulation. Reinforcement learning, but not repeated stimulus exposure, enhanced tuft selectivity for both directions equally, even though only one was associated with reward. Selective tufts emerged from initially unresponsive or low-selectivity populations. Animal movement and choice did not account for changes in stimulus selectivity. Enhanced selectivity persisted even after rewards were removed and animals ceased performing the task. We conclude that learning produces long-lasting realignment of apical dendrite tuft responses to behaviorally relevant dimensions of a task.