standOff. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote shown on the same row, so the borrowing can be checked against the thing borrowed from without leaving this page. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
The reference list is not part of the text we hold for this paper. Our copy was extracted from the publisher's page and the bibliography did not survive that extraction, so the article below ends before its references. Nothing has been removed by us.
MINI REVIEW ARTICLE published: 18 March 2014 doi: 10.3389/fnint.2014.00025
Operant conditioning of spinal reflexes: from basic science to clinical therapy
Aiko K. Thompson1,2,3,4* and Jonathan R. Wolpaw1,2,3,4
1 Helen Hayes Hospital, New York State Department of Health, West Haverstraw, NY, USA 2 Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA 3 Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA 4 Department of Biomedical Sciences, University at Albany, State University of New York, Albany, NY, USA
Edited by: Martin Oudega, University of Pittsburgh, USA
Reviewed by: James W. Grau, Texas A and M University, USA Jeffrey C. Petruska, University of Louisville, USA
*Correspondence: Aiko K. Thompson, Translational Neurological Research Program, Helen Hayes Hospital, New York State Department of Health, Route 9W, West Haverstraw, NY 10993, USA e-mail: a.kido.thompson@gmail.com
New appreciation of the adaptive capabilities of the nervous system, recent recognition that most spinal cord injuries are incomplete, and progress in enabling regeneration are generating growing interest in novel rehabilitation therapies. phenomenoncontent_tagsHere we review the 35-year evolution of one promising new approach, operant conditioning of spinal reflexes. This work began in the late 1970’s as basic science; its purpose was to develop and exploit a uniquely accessible model for studying the acquisition and maintenance of a simple behavior in the mammalian central nervous system (CNS). The model was developed first in monkeys and then in rats, mice, and humans. Studies with it showed that the ostensibly simple behavior (i.e., a larger or smaller reflex) rests on a complex hierarchy of brain and spinal cord plasticity; and current investigations are delineating this plasticity and its interactions with the plasticity that supports other behaviors. In the last decade, the possible therapeutic uses of reflex conditioning have come under study, first in rats and then in humans. The initial results are very exciting, and they are spurring further studies. At the same time, the original basic science purpose and the new clinical purpose are enabling and illuminating each other in unexpected ways. The long course and current state of this work illustrate the practical importance of basic research and the valuable synergy that can develop between basic science questions and clinical needs.
Keywords: H-reflex, spinal cord plasticity, locomotion, learning and memory, spinal cord injury
INTRODUCTION Perhaps the most important neuroscience advance of the past half-century has been the recognition that the central nervous system (CNS) changes throughout life, that activity-dependent plasticity occurs continually everywhere in the CNS. The numerous ramifications of this recognition are now being pursued. Spinal cord research is a particularly active area. New appreciation of spinal cord plasticity, evidence that most spinal cord injuries are incomplete, and some success in initiating regeneration are encouraging the translation of basic science insights into new methods for improving recovery of function. For example, the benefits of locomotor training, which were first discovered in the 1950’s (Shurrager and Dykman, 1951) and drew renewed attention in the 1980’s (Lovely et al., 1986; Barbeau and Rossignol, 1987), have developed into an important rehabilitation method (Wernig and Müller, 1992; Edgerton et al., 2001, 2008; Maegele et al., 2002; Barbeau, 2003; Harkema et al., 2012). method↗This review tracks the evolution of another basic science exploration of spinal cord plasticity into a promising new clinical therapy. It emphasizes the importance of basic science for clinical progress and the powerful synergy that can develop between basic and clinical research.
claim_relationsThe concept of the spinal cord as a hard-wired reflex center, enunciated by Marshall Hall in the 19th century (Hall, 1833) and widely accepted through the 20th century, continues to exert strong influence, despite the extensive evidence for activitydependent spinal cord plasticity in health and disease (Mendell, 1984; Wolpaw and Carp, 1993; Wolpaw and Tennissen, 2001; Edgerton et al., 2004; Frigon and Rossignol, 2006; Zehr, 2006; Petruska et al., 2007; Courtine et al., 2009; Dietz et al., 2009; Wolpaw, 2010; Rossignol et al., 2011; Grau, 2013). This evidence falls into two broad categories: plasticity in the spinal cord produced by physiological or pathological influence from the brain; and plasticity in the isolated spinal cord produced by peripheral input. Operant conditioning of spinal cord reflexes falls into the first category.
claim_relationsThe first effort to demonstrate such conditioning was based on Anna Di Giorgio’s demonstration that abnormal descending activity caused by a supraspinal lesion could produce change in the spinal cord that persisted after the activity ended (Di Giorgio, 1929, 1942), and on evidence of task-dependent changes in spinal reflexes (reviewed in Wolpaw et al., 1983b). Taken together, these studies suggested that, if an operant conditioning protocol induced the brain to produce a constant descending influence on a spinal reflex pathway, and if that influence continued long
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
www.frontiersin.org
March 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 25 | 1
INTEGRATIVE NEUROSCIENCE Thompson and Wolpaw
Evolution of reflex operant conditioning
enough, the spinal reflex pathway would change. The protocol would thereby create a unique model for studying the substrates of a memory (i.e., a persistent change in behavior) in the mammalian CNS (Wolpaw, 1982; Wolpaw et al., 1983b). The experimental accessibility and relative simplicity of the spinal cord, its connection to the brain by well-defined and accessible pathways, and its direct connection to behavior would make it possible to describe the spinal cord plasticity underlying the memory, understand exactly how it changes behavior, and define the brainspinal cord interactions that create and maintain it.
Since its beginning in 1978, this work has progressed through model development to mechanistic studies to clinical application. Figure 1 shows the major landmarks. As early mechanistic studies began to elucidate the mechanisms of conditioning, they encouraged pre-clinical and clinical studies, which in turn are now guiding further mechanistic investigations.
MODEL DEVELOPMENT: ESTABLISHING THE PHENOMENON In the late 1950’s, motor physiologists became very interested in the sequence of electromyographic (EMG) responses to sudden muscle stretch in monkeys and humans performing simisometric tasks, such as maintaining elbow angle against a constant opposing torque (e.g., Hammond, 1956; Lee and Tatton, 1975; Bawa et al., 1979; Lee et al., 1983). They identified a succession of responses that began with the earliest purely spinal and largely monosynaptic M1 response (i.e., the spinal stretch reflex (SSR)), proceeded through multisynaptic spinal or transcortical M2 and M3 components, and ended with late clearly intentional responses (Hammond, 1956; Lee and Tatton, 1975; Bawa et al., 1979; Lee
et al., 1983; Christensen et al., 2000, 2001; Grey et al., 2001). The dependence of these components on prior instruction (i.e., “oppose the sudden stretch” or “do not oppose”) grew with their latency: the latest purely intentional responses were absent for the “do not oppose” instruction; middle-latency components were much reduced; and the earliest M1 component showed little or no effect.
In these studies, the instruction typically changed from trial to trial; and the investigators focused on the later components and their relationships to and dependence on neuronal activity in sensorimotor cortex (e.g., Evarts and Tanji, 1974). Nevertheless, some studies noted that the instruction had some effect on the earliest purely spinal M1 component (reviewed in Wolpaw et al., 1983b). This observation, combined with the Di Giorgio studies (Di Giorgio, 1929, 1942), prompted the initial effort to determine whether an operant conditioning protocol could change the SSR in the monkey biceps muscle (Wolpaw et al., 1983a). The protocol had three key features: (1) it required maintenance of both a certain elbow angle and a certain level of biceps EMG activity as the animal opposed a constant extension torque; (2) it based reward on the size of the SSR (measured by EMG) evoked by a brief pulse of additional extension torque; and (3) limitationsconcepts↗sensesthe reward criterion (i.e., equivalent to the instruction) remained constant over days and weeks (i.e., reward occurred when the SSR was above (up-conditioning) or below (downconditioning) a criterion). In sum, the protocol was designed to induce and maintain a long-term change in descending influence over the spinal arc of the reflex, and to thereby change the spinal cord.
FIGURE 1 | Operant conditioning of spinal reflexes from 1978 to 2013. The work began with model development and progressed to mechanistic studies and then to clinical applications. These three phases have overlapped
to a considerable degree and continue to do so. (SCI: spinal cord injury) (Wolpaw et al., 1983b; Wolpaw, 1987; Chen and Wolpaw, 1995; Carp et al., 2006a; Chen et al., 2006d; Thompson et al., 2009, 2013b).
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
www.frontiersin.org
March 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 25 | 2
Thompson and Wolpaw
Evolution of reflex operant conditioning
content_tagsThis protocol was successful: in 10 of 11 monkeys, biceps SSR size changed substantially in the correct direction, and lesser SSR changes occurred in the biceps synergists, brachialis and brachioradialis (Wolpaw et al., 1983a,c). Reflex change developed over days and weeks, so that a standard 50-day conditioning period (preceded by a 10-day control period) was adopted. The controlsconcepts↗concepts↗initial results led to the second version of the model, operant conditioning of the monkey triceps surae H-reflex (Wolpaw, 1987), which had two advantages. It eliminated change in muscle spindle sensitivity as the mechanism of the reflex change; and it enabled conditioning in freely moving monkeys (Wolpaw and Herchenroder, 1990). limitationssensesHowever, the prolonged course of conditioning and the difficulties of primate research constrained mechanistic studies.
These constraints drove development of the next version, operant conditioning of the soleus H-reflex in the rat (Figure 2A; Chen and Wolpaw, 1995). The rat model reduced the practical difficulties of the work and increased the numbers of animals that could be studied, and thus the questions that could be asked. It remains the primary laboratory tool. More recently, a comparable mouse model has been validated, primarily for its potential application to genomic studies of the conditioning phenomenon (Carp et al., 2006a).
Growing interest in potential clinical applications of reflex conditioning, and demonstration of biceps SSR conditioning in humans (Evatt et al., 1989; Segal and Wolf, 1994; Wolf and Segal, 1996), prompted development of soleus H-reflex conditioning in humans (Figure 2B). While this new version of the model had the three key features of the animal versions (i.e., defined level of pre-stimulus EMG, reward based on reflex size as measured by EMG, and an unchanging reward contingency), it differed in several ways. First, the protocol was not available continuously; content_tagsconditioning occurred in three one-hour sessions per week, each containing 225 conditioning trials. Thus, over the 8–10 weeks of conditioning, the subjects completed only about 3–5% as many trials as rats did over their 50 days of conditioning. Second, the human H-reflex was elicited and EMG activity was recorded by superficial rather than implanted electrodes. Third, the reward was visual feedback (i.e., a green bar (H-reflex size criterion satisfied) or red bar (H-reflex size criterion not satisfied) on a computer screen) rather than a food pellet. Fourth, a small number of trials at the beginning of each session were control trials, in which the subject was not asked to change the reflex and received no feedback as to reflex size.
The results obtained with these five versions of the model (i.e., monkey biceps SSR, monkey triceps surae H-reflex, rat soleus Hreflex, mouse soleus H-reflex, and human soleus H-reflex) were similar in the proportion of subjects in which conditioning was successful and in the course and final magnitude of reflex change (Wolpaw et al., 1983a; Wolpaw, 1987; Chen and Wolpaw, 1995; Carp et al., 2006b; Thompson et al., 2009). content_tagscontent_tagsFor all versions, conditioning succeeded in 75–80% of the subjects; in the other 20–25%, the reflex remained close to its initial size. Reflex change typically began with a rapid small change in the correct direction, progressed gradually over days and weeks, and appeared to asymptote by 50–60 days (Wolpaw and O’Keefe, 1984; Wolpaw et al., 1994; Chen et al., 2001; Thompson et al., 2009). In rats
and monkeys, content_tagscontent_tagsfinal reflex size was about 175% of its initial value for up-conditioning and 55% for down-conditioning. content_tagscontent_tagsIn humans, who performed only 3–5% as many trials as the animals, final reflex size averaged 140% for up-conditioning and 69% for downconditioning. The inter-version and inter-species similarities in course and magnitude of reflex change suggest that mechanistic studies in one version are relevant to understanding the mechanisms in others. Furthermore, the differences in plasticity between successful and unsuccessful animals can provide insight into the substrates of reflex change.
MECHANISTIC STUDIES: PHYSIOLOGICAL AND ANATOMICAL SUBSTRATES OF CONDITIONING In accord with the original goal, to use reflex operant conditioning to investigate learning and memory, mechanistic studies began in the mid-1980’s and continue at present. They are delineating the spinal cord plasticity associated with conditioning and revealing the role of the brain in producing and maintaining this plasticity.
content_tagsThese studies began with the demonstration that H-reflex conditioning changed the spinal cord: the reflex asymmetry produced by conditioning persisted for at least several days after all supraspinal input was removed (Wolpaw and Lee, 1989). content_tagsIntracellular studies in primates and rats revealed that successful down-conditioning affected motoneuron firing threshold and reduced axonal conduction velocity (Carp and Wolpaw, 1994; Carp et al., 2001a,b). content_tagsThe positive shift in threshold, plus a small decrease in the primary afferent excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP), largely explained the smaller H-reflex (Halter et al., 1995). mechanisms↗A change in motoneuron sodium channels was the likely origin of the threshold shift and the reduced conduction velocity (Halter et al., 1995; Wang et al., 2013). In addition, electromicroscopic and immunohistochemical studies found changes in several different synaptic populations on the motoneuron (Carp and Wolpaw, 1994; Halter et al., 1995; Feng-Chen and Wolpaw, 1996; Carp et al., 2001b; Wang et al., 2006; Pillai et al., 2008). content_tagsParticularly prominent was a marked increase in the number of identifiable GABAergic terminals with successful down-conditioning (Wang et al., 2006); this was accompanied by a corresponding increase in the number of identifiable GABAergic interneurons in the ventral horn (Wang et al., 2009). Furthermore, physiological analyses found change in di- or tri-synaptic pathways contributing to the H-reflex, particularly in up-conditioning (Wolpaw and Chen, 2001), and detected effects on motor unit type (Carp et al., 2001b). Reflex conditioning even affected the contralateral side of the spinal cord (Carp and Wolpaw, 1995).
In summary, H-reflex conditioning produces complex multisite plasticity in the spinal cord (Figure 2C). While some of these changes appear to underlie the H-reflex change (i.e., primary plasticity (Wolpaw and O’Keefe, 1984; Wolpaw, 2010)), others seem to be unrelated (e.g., the change in the contralateral spinal cord (Wolpaw and Lee, 1989; Carp and Wolpaw, 1995; Pillai et al., 2008)). content_tags↗These latter changes are likely to represent compensatory plasticity that preserves other behaviors affected by the change in the H-reflex pathway, or reactive (i.e., downstream) plasticity due to the changes in ongoing CNS activity produced by primary and
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
www.frontiersin.org
March 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 25 | 3
Thompson and Wolpaw
Evolution of reflex operant conditioning
FIGURE 2 | H-reflex operant conditioning results in rats (A) and humans (B), and the hierarchy of brain and spinal cord plasticity that underlies H-reflex conditioning (C). (A) As illustrated in Figure 1 (“Rat H-reflex”), in a rat with chronically implanted EMG electrodes and a tibial nerve cuff, the implant wires travel subcutaneously to a head-mounted connector and then through a flexible cable and a commutator to amplifiers and stimulator. The rat moves freely about the cage as soleus muscle activity is monitored 24 h per day. Whenever the absolute (i.e., rectified) value of soleus EMG stays in a specified range for a randomly varying 2.3- to 2.7-s period, a nerve cuff stimulus elicits an M-wave just above threshold and an H-reflex. Top: For the first 10 days (from day –10 to day 0), the rat is exposed to the control mode, in which no reward occurs and the H-reflex is simply measured to determine its initial size. For the next 50 days, it is exposed to the up-conditioning (HRup) or down-conditioning (HRdown) mode, in which a food-pellet reward occurs whenever the H-reflex is above (HRup) or below (HRdown) a criterion value. content_tagsA rat averages 2000–6000 trials per day, and the criterion is set to provide 500–1000 rewards per day to satisfy the daily requirement (based on body weight). content_tags↗content_tags↗The background EMG and the M-wave stay constant throughout. content_tags↗Successful conditioning (defined as a change of at least 20% in the correct direction) occurs in 75–80% of the rats (the others remain within 20% of their control value). content_tags↗content_tags↗content_tagsThe graphs show average (± SEM) daily H-reflex sizes for 59 successful HRup rats (red upward triangles) and 81 successful HRdown rats (blue downward triangles). In both groups, mode-appropriate change in H-reflex size develops steadily over the 50 days. Bottom: Average absolute post-stimulus EMG for representative days from an HRup rat (left) and an HRdown rat (right) under the control mode (solid) and near the end of HRup or HRdown conditioning (dashed). After conditioning, the H-reflex is larger in the HRup rat and smaller in the HRdown rat, while the background EMG activity and the M-wave have not changed (Updated from Wolpaw, 1997). (B) As illustrated in Figure 1 (“Human H-reflex”), EMG activity is monitored in a person with EMG electrodes over the soleus muscle and tibial nerve-stimulating electrodes in the popliteal fossa. The person maintains a natural standing posture facing a screen that displays the current absolute level of soleus EMG in relation to a specified range. Whenever the absolute value of soleus EMG stays in this range for several sec, tibial nerve stimulation elicits an M-wave just above threshold and an H-reflex. Top: For
the first six sessions (i.e., baseline sessions, from day −14 to day 0), the person is exposed to the control mode, in which the H-reflex is simply measured to determine its initial size. For the next 24 sessions (i.e., conditioning sessions, days 0–56, three sessions per week), the person is exposed to the HRup or HRdown conditioning mode, in which, after each conditioning trial, the screen provides immediate feedback indicating whether the H-reflex was above (HRup) or below (HRdown) a criterion value. The person completes 225 conditioning trials per session. The background EMG and the M-wave stay constant throughout the sessions. Successful conditioning occurs in about 80% of the people. The graphs show average (± SEM) daily H-reflex sizes for six successful HRup people (red upward triangles) and eight successful HRdown people (blue downward triangles). In both groups, mode-appropriate change in H-reflex size develops steadily over the 24 conditioning sessions. Bottom: Average peri-stimulus EMG from an HRup subject (left) and an HRdown subject (right) for a baseline session (i.e., control mode) (solid) and for the last HRup or HRdown conditioning session (dashed) (A stimulus artifact occurs at 0 ms) (From Thompson et al., 2009). (C) A hierarchy of brain and spinal cord plasticity underlies H-reflex conditioning. The shaded ovals indicate the spinal and supraspinal sites of definite or probable plasticity associated with operant conditioning of the H-reflex. “MN” is the motoneuron, “CST” is the main corticospinal tract, “IN” is a spinal interneuron, and “GABA IN” is a GABAergic spinal interneuron. Dashed pathways imply the possibility of intervening spinal interneurons. The monosynaptic and probably oligosynaptic H-reflex pathway from groups Ia, II, and Ib afferents to the motoneuron is shown. Definite (dark gray) or probable (light gray) sites of plasticity include: the motoneuron membrane (i.e., firing threshold and axonal conduction velocity); motor unit properties; GABAergic interneurons; GABAergic terminals and C terminals on the motoneuron; the Ia afferent synaptic connection; terminals conveying oligosynaptic groups I and II inhibition or excitation to the motoneuron; sensorimotor cortex; and cerebellum. As described in the text, the data suggest that the reward contingency acts through the inferior olive to guide and maintain plasticity in the cerebellum that guides and maintains plasticity in sensorimotor cortex that (via the CST) guides and maintains plasticity in the spinal cord that is directly responsible for H-reflex change (Modified from Wolpaw, 2010).
compensatory plasticity (Wolpaw and O’Keefe, 1984; Wolpaw, 2010).
Lesion studies of the dependence of H-reflex change on brain-spinal cord connections showed that H-reflex conditioning
content_tagsrequires the corticospinal tract and sensorimotor cortex, but does not require other major descending or ascending spinal cord pathways (Chen et al., 2002, 2006a,c; Chen and Wolpaw, 2002). The cerebellum and the inferior olive are essential, at
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
www.frontiersin.org
March 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 25 | 4
Thompson and Wolpaw
Evolution of reflex operant conditioning
least for down-conditioning (Chen and Wolpaw, 2005; Wolpaw and Chen, 2006; Chen et al., 2012). Since the rubrospinal tract is not needed, cerebellar output to cortex appears to be the cerebellum’s crucial contribution (Chen and Wolpaw, 2005; Wolpaw and Chen, 2006). The effects of specific lesions after down-conditioning has occurred indicates that plasticity in sensorimotor cortex (or closely related areas) is essential for the survival (beyond 5–10 days) of the spinal cord plasticity directly responsible for H-reflex change (Chen et al., 2006a,c), that content_tagsthe cerebellum is essential for the long-term maintenance (beyond 40 days) of this cortical plasticity (Chen and Wolpaw, 2005; Wolpaw and Chen, 2006), and that the cerebellum’s role may depend on cerebellar plasticity that is induced and maintained by climbing fiber input from the inferior olive (Chen et al., 2012). mechanisms↗Taken together, these studies showed that H-reflex conditioning depends on a hierarchy of plasticity (i.e., Figure 2C), in which the reward contingency produces plasticity in the brain that guides and maintains the plasticity in the spinal cord that is directly responsible for the H-reflex change (Wolpaw, 2010).
THERAPEUTIC APPLICATIONS The work summarized above also explored the impact of H-reflex conditioning on the functioning of the reflex pathway during locomotion and on locomotion itself. In normal rats, the conditioned reflex increases or decreases were evident during locomotion; and the altered H-reflex pathway affected locomotor EMG activity and kinematics. limitationsconcepts↗concepts↗sensesconcept_edgescontent_tagsHowever, conditioning did not disturb important locomotor features, such as right/left symmetry and step-length (Chen et al., 2005). mechanisms↗It appeared that compensatory changes in the behavior of other muscles prevented soleus Hreflex conditioning from disturbing normal locomotion (Chen et al., 2011). Nevertheless, this work suggested that H-reflex conditioning might improve locomotion impaired by trauma or disease.
The first exploration of possible therapeutic effects asked whether right soleus H-reflex up-conditioning could improve locomotion in rats in which a lesion of the right lateral column of the spinal cord had weakened right stance and produced an asymmetrical step-cycle (i.e., the rats limped). content_tagsThe step-cycle asymmetry disappeared in up-conditioned rats and did not change in rats in which the H-reflex was simply measured (Chen et al., 2006d). This finding that up-conditioning modified locomotion in spinal cord-injured rats differed from the results in normal rats, in which compensatory plasticity prevented H-reflex conditioning from modifying (i.e., impairing) locomotion (Chen et al., 2011). In rats in which locomotion was already abnormal, Hreflex conditioning aimed at counteracting the deficit improved locomotion.
These results spurred development of the human soleus Hreflex conditioning protocol (Thompson et al., 2009). As noted above, this human protocol had a new feature that was absent in the animal versions. In each conditioning session, it measured 20 control H-reflexes (i.e., elicited without the reward contingency), as well as 225 conditioned H-reflexes. Thus, in addition to demonstrating H-reflex conditioning in humans, it was able to show that this conditioning is the sum of two
phenomena: content_tags↗content_tags↗within-session change (i.e., task-dependent adaptation) that appears after 4–6 conditioning sessions and probably reflects immediate change in cortical influence (e.g., on presynaptic inhibition); and gradual across-session change (i.e., long-term change) that begins after 10–12 sessions and probably reflects spinal cord plasticity (Thompson et al., 2009). Task-dependent adaptation affects the H-reflex only during the conditioning protocol. In contrast, long-term change affects the H-reflex continuously and across a wide range of stimulus levels (Thompson et al., 2013a). Thus, it affects other behaviors (e.g., locomotion). The major theoretical and practical significance of this impact on other behaviors is discussed further below.
The development of this human protocol, the evidence that it induces long-term plasticity in the spinal cord pathway, and the evidence of therapeutic efficacy in rats enabled and encouraged an effort to determine whether H-reflex conditioning could improve locomotion in people with chronic incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI; Thompson et al., 2013b). The subjects were people in whom spasticity impaired locomotion; thus downconditioning of the soleus H-reflex was the logical therapeutic intervention. content_tagsOver 30 conditioning sessions, the soleus H-reflex decreased in two-thirds of the subjects and remained smaller several months later; in these subjects walking speed increased and right-left symmetry improved, with better EMG modulation across the step-cycle in both legs. In contrast, these improvements did not occur in subjects in whom down-conditioning was not successful or in subjects in whom the H-reflex was simply measured for 30 sessions. Furthermore, beginning about 5 weeks into the conditioning sessions, all of the subjects in whom the H-reflex decreased commented spontaneously that they were walking faster and farther in their daily lives, and several noted less clonus, easier stepping, less arm weight-bearing, and/or other improvements.
These animal and human results indicate that reflex conditioning protocols can improve recovery after chronic incomplete SCI, and possibly in other disorders. Indeed, studies in rats in which the sciatic nerve has been transected and has regenerated suggest that appropriate H-reflex conditioning can improve recovery when the normal Ia afferent connections to motoneurons have been disrupted (Chen et al., 2010).
Operant conditioning protocols designed to change other pathways might also have therapeutic value. Reciprocal inhibition in the spinal cord can be conditioned (Chen et al., 2006b). The motor evoked potential (MEP) in response to transcranial magnetic stimulation can be conditioned; this protocol might be used to improve corticospinal connectivity (Abel et al., 2011; Thompson et al., 2011). content_tags↗The essential attribute of these protocols is that they base reward on the activity in a specific CNS pathway (e.g., the soleus H-reflex pathway, a corticospinal pathway). Thus, they produce “targeted neuroplasticity.” They are both flexible and specific; they can either increase or decrease activity in a specific pathway. Thus, a protocol can be designed to address an individual’s specific deficit. For example, in rats with weak right stance, H-reflex up-conditioning that enhanced the stance-phase soleus burst improved locomotion, while in people with spasticity, down-conditioning that reduced excessive soleus activation through the reflex pathway produced improvement
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
www.frontiersin.org
March 2014 | Volume 8 | Article 25 | 5
Thompson and Wolpaw
Evolution of reflex operant conditioning
(Chen et al., 2006d; Thompson et al., 2013b). This flexibility and specificity contrast with drug interventions (e.g., botulinum toxin and baclofen), which simply weaken muscles or reflexes and may have undesirable side effects (Dario et al., 2004; Dario and Tomei, 2004; Sheean, 2006; Ward, 2008; Thomas and Simpson, 2012).
Furthermore, the targeted plasticity produced by an appropriate operant conditioning protocol can trigger plasticity elsewhere that has widespread beneficial effects. In people with SCI, the benefits of down-conditioning extended far beyond those attributable to weakening the soleus H-reflex pathway in one leg: locomotor EMG activity improved in proximal and distal muscles of both legs; and people noted improvements in other aspects of motor function (e.g., balance; Thompson et al., 2013b). concepts↗These widespread benefits are explicable in terms of the “negotiated equilibrium” hypothesis of spinal cord function (Wolpaw, 2010). content_tags↗According to this hypothesis, the brain maintains spinal neurons and synapses in an equilibrium that serves all the behaviors in the current repertoire. mechanisms↗When the acquisition of a new behavior (e.g., a larger or smaller H-reflex) changes the spinal cord and disturbs older behaviors, it triggers widespread adaptive changes that arrive at a new equilibrium that serves the expanded repertoire. When an older behavior has been impaired by trauma or disease, the new equilibrium may actually improve it (Chen et al., 2013; Thompson et al., 2013b).
CONCLUSION The importance of basic science as a driver and enabler of clinical progress, and the role of clinical needs in encouraging and justifying basic science, are illustrated by the work reviewed here. When the development of reflex operant conditioning began 35 years ago, the prevailing view of the spinal cord was that it was simply a hard-wired reflex center. The demonstration of reflex operant conditioning helped to overturn this traditional view, and provided a unique model for studying learning and memory in the mammalian CNS. The possibility that the model could have clinical applications did not draw attention for some years. claim_typeAs it has turned out, operant conditioning of spinal cord reflexes is both a valuable laboratory model and a potentially powerful therapeutic method. The experimental accessibility and relative simplicity of the spinal cord, its connection to the brain by well-defined and accessible pathways, its closeness to behavior, and its role (along with the analogous brainstem nuclei) as the final common pathway for all neuromuscular behaviors, make reflex conditioning extremely useful for defining the plasticity underlying a memory, determining how this plasticity affects behavior, and exploring the brain-spinal cord interactions that create and maintain this plasticity. These same attributes underlie its clinical promise. Its ability to target spinal pathways that participate in many important behaviors make reflex operant conditioning a flexible and specific method for addressing functional deficits. Furthermore, its broad beneficial effects are guiding basic studies and generating new thinking about the role of the spinal cord in behavior and about how the many behaviors in an individual’s repertoire are acquired and maintained.
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 1 relation here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| claim_type | method | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | operant conditioning of spinal reflexes | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | review also in: review | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms | mechanisms[2] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms | mechanisms[3] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The preparation was changed twice for tractability, altering what could be studied each time. what this limits: any comparison across the versions of this model: the prolonged course of conditioning and the difficulties of primate research constrained mechanistic studies, and those constraints drove development of the next version of the preparation | limitations[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | The null on locomotor features is attributed to active compensation, not to absence of influence. what this limits: any citation of this work as showing conditioning does not affect locomotion: conditioning did not disturb features such as right/left symmetry and step-length, and the authors attribute this to compensatory changes in the behavior of other muscles | limitations[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| limitations | An animal reward threshold is declared equivalent to a human verbal instruction. what this limits: any transfer of this protocol between species: the reward criterion is described as equivalent to the instruction, and it remained constant over days and weeks | limitations[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| controls | change in muscle spindle sensitivity as the mechanism of the reflex change eliminates: the reading that the conditioned reflex change is peripheral rather than central · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | H-reflex also in: H-reflex | concepts[0] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | muscle spindle sensitivity also in: muscle spindle sensitivity | concepts[1] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | reward criterion also in: reward criterion | concepts[2] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | locomotor features also in: locomotor features | concepts[3] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | negotiated equilibrium also in: negotiated equilibrium | concepts[4] | the paper's words | |
| concepts | conditioning also in: conditioning | concepts[5] | the paper's words | |
| senses | the model - THREE PREPARATIONS UNDER ONE NAME: the second version eliminated muscle spindle sensitivity as a rival mechanism and allowed freely moving animals, and the third was adopted because primate work constrained mechanistic study, so 'operant conditioning of spinal reflexes' names a succession of preparations chosen partly for tractability | senses[0] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | the locomotor null - AN ABSENCE OF NET DISTURBANCE, NOT OF INFLUENCE: conditioning did not disturb right/left symmetry or step-length, and the authors attribute that to compensatory changes in other muscles, so the unchanged measure is the output of an active adjustment rather than a system that was not affected | senses[1] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| senses | the reward criterion - THE ANIMAL'S EQUIVALENT OF THE HUMAN INSTRUCTION: declared so in a parenthesis, which is how a rat's EMG threshold and a person's verbal task instruction come to occupy one slot in a protocol description | senses[2] | 1.0 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Di Giorgio (1929, 1942) | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | contradicts → Marshall Hall's concept of the spinal cord as a hard-wired reflex center (Hall, 1833) | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | conditioning —causes→ locomotor features direction on the measure: no-change · strength of the relation: 1
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but attributed: the span reports Chen et al. (2005). also in: conditioning · locomotor features | concept_edges[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | standard error of the mean also in: standard error of the mean | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Across all versions, conditioning succeeded in 75-80% of subjects, and in the rest the reflex stayed near its initial size. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Final reflex size was about 175% of baseline for up-conditioning and 55% for down-conditioning. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Humans reached 140% (up) and 69% (down) of baseline despite completing only 3-5% as many trials as the animals. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The conditioning-induced reflex asymmetry outlasted removal of all descending input, proving the change resides in the spinal cord itself. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Down-conditioning raises the motoneuron firing threshold and slows axonal conduction velocity. | content_tags.findings[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The threshold shift together with a small reduction in the Ia afferent EPSP accounts for most of the smaller reflex. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Successful down-conditioning markedly increases the number of GABAergic terminals on the motoneuron. | content_tags.findings[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Lesion work shows the corticospinal tract and sensorimotor cortex are necessary for reflex conditioning while other descending and ascending tracts are not. | content_tags.findings[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The cerebellum is required to keep the cortical plasticity alive beyond about 40 days. | content_tags.findings[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | In normal rats the conditioned reflex change leaves right/left symmetry and step length intact. | content_tags.findings[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Up-conditioning abolished the limp of rats with a lateral-column lesion while reflex-measurement-only controls stayed asymmetrical. | content_tags.findings[10] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | In people with chronic incomplete SCI, 30 down-conditioning sessions reduced the soleus H-reflex in two-thirds of subjects and produced faster, more symmetrical walking with better bilateral EMG modulation, with the reflex still reduced months later. | content_tags.findings[11] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | targeted neuroplasticity also in: targeted neuroplasticity | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | negotiated equilibrium also in: negotiated equilibrium | content_tags.definitions[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | successful conditioning also in: successful conditioning | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | compensatory plasticity also in: compensatory plasticity | content_tags.definitions[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | task-dependent adaptation also in: task-dependent adaptation | content_tags.definitions[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | long-term change also in: long-term change | content_tags.definitions[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | H-reflex size also in: H-reflex size | content_tags.variables[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | background EMG also in: background EMG | content_tags.variables[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | M-wave also in: M-wave | content_tags.variables[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 75–80% — proportion of subjects in which conditioning succeeded, consistent across all five species/model versions | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 175% / 55% — final reflex size as a percentage of baseline in rats and monkeys, for up- and down-conditioning | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 140% / 69% — final reflex size as a percentage of baseline in humans, for up- and down-conditioning | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 10 of 11 — monkeys in which the biceps spinal stretch reflex changed in the rewarded direction in the first demonstration | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 225 — conditioning trials completed per one-hour human session, three sessions per week | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 2000–6000 — conditioning trials a rat performs per day, yielding 500-1000 rewards | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 59 / 81 — number of successfully up-conditioned and down-conditioned rats contributing to the averaged rat curves | content_tags.quantities[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 35-year — span of the research programme the review covers, from 1978 basic science to clinical therapy | content_tags.quantities[7] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.