Studies Identify Spinal Cord Neurons that Control Skilled Limb Movement

Researchers have identified two types of neurons that enable the spinal cord to control skilled forelimb movement. The first is a group of excitatory interneurons that are needed to make accurate and precise movements; the second is a group of inhibitory interneurons necessary for achieving smooth movement of the limbs. The findings are important steps toward understanding normal human motor function and potentially treating movement disorders that arise from injury or disease.

“We take for granted many motor behaviors, such as catching a ball or flipping a coin, that in fact require considerable planning and precision,” said Columbia University Medical Center’s (CUMC’s) Thomas M. Jessell, PhD, a senior author of both studies, which were published separately in recent issues of Nature (1, 2). “While such motor acts seem effortless, they depend on intricate and carefully orchestrated communication between neural networks that connect the brain to the spinal cord and muscles.”

To move one’s hand to a desired target, the brain sends the spinal cord signals, which activate the motor neurons that control limb muscles. During subsequent movements, information from the limb is conveyed back to the brain and spinal cord, providing a feedback system that can support the control and adjustment of motor output.

“But feedback from muscles is not quick enough to permit the most rapid real-time adjustments of fine motor control,” said Dr. Jessell, “suggesting that there may be other, faster, systems at play.” Dr. Jessell is the Claire Tow Professor of Motor Neuron Disorders in the Departments of Neuroscience and of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, co-director of the Mortimer B. Zuckerman Mind Brain Behavior Institute, co-director of the Kavli Institute for Brain Science, and a Howard Hughes Medical Institute investigator, all at Columbia.

Researchers had suspected that one rapid form of feedback might derive from a group of interneurons in the cervical spinal cord called propriospinal neurons (PNs). Like many other neurons, PNs send signals to motor neurons that innervate arm muscles and trigger movement. But this subset of neurons also has a distinct output branch that projects away from motor neurons towards the cerebellum. Through this dual-branched anatomy, these neurons have the potential to carry internal copies of motor output signals up to the brain.

However, the nature of this internal feedback pathway and whether it has any impact on movement have not been clear. “If PNs were indeed sending copies of outgoing motor commands to the brain, they could provide a conveniently rapid means of adjusting ongoing movements when things go awry,” said Eiman Azim, PhD, a postdoctoral fellow in Dr. Jessell’s lab and lead author of the first paper. “But without a way to selectively target the copy function of PNs, there was no way to test this theory.”

The CUMC team, in collaboration with Bror Alstermark, PhD, a professor in integrative medical biology at Umeå University in Sweden, overcame this technical barrier by developing a genetic method for accessing and eliminating PNs in mice, abolishing both motor-directed and copy signals sent by the neurons. When the researchers quantified the limb movements of the PN-deprived mice in three dimensions as they reached for food pellets, they found that the mice’s ability to reach for the target accurately was badly compromised. “Basically, their movements were uncoordinated,” said Dr. Azim. “The PN-deprived mice consistently over- or under-reached.”

But with both PN output signals gone, the precise role of the PN copy signal remained unclear. The researchers then turned to optogenetics—the use of light to control neuronal activity. They selectively activated the copy axonal branch alone, decalibrating this copy signal from the version sent to motor neurons. With the copy signal altered, the animals’ ability to reach was severely compromised, indicating that the PN copy pathway is capable of influencing the outcome of goal-directed reaching movements.

The PN copy signal also works blazingly fast. It takes just 4 to 5 milliseconds for motor neuron activity to be altered after transmission of a PN copy signal. “These reaching movements typically take 200 to 300 milliseconds, so the PN copy signal pathway appears well equipped to correct arm movements,” said Dr. Azim. The researchers think that this copy signal represents just one of many similar internal feedback pathways that the spinal cord and brain use to validate and correct movements throughout the body.

Are these findings relevant to human motor performance? Many of the pathways and circuits that influence reach and grasp in monkeys and humans are conserved in mice. “We need to learn more about these pathways before we can evaluate how their dysfunction contributes to deficits seen after spinal cord injury and neurodegenerative disease,” said Dr. Azim.

In the second Nature study, CUMC researchers examined how spinal circuits regulate sensory feedback from muscles to control movement. The simplest form of this feedback system involves a reflex pathway (such as the knee-jerk reflex), in which sensory endings in muscles convey signals to the motor system through direct monosynaptic connections with motor neurons. Signals from motor neurons, in turn, cause muscles to contract, completing the reflex cycle.

Researchers have long wondered how the strength of this sensory signal might be regulated. Studies had shown that spinal interneurons—in particular those that release the neurotransmitter GABA, inhibiting neuronal activity—play a key role in this process. But most GABA-releasing interneurons exert their effects postsynaptically, by blocking the excitation of neurons on the receiving end of a synapse (the gap across which two neurons communicate).

“We knew that such neurons are unlikely to be responsible for fine-tuning the sensory signal,” said lead author Andrew J. P. Fink, PhD, a former graduate student in Dr. Jessell’s lab. “Postsynaptic inhibition affects the entire neuron, and motor neurons receive many different inputs. So a mechanism that shut down the motor neuron to all of its inputs would lack refinement.”

Researchers have long speculated that one subset of GABAergic interneurons might regulate movement by controlling the strength of sensory feedback signals from muscles. “These particular neurons are known to work presynaptically, by forming direct connections with the terminals of sensory neurons and suppressing the release of sensory neurotransmitter,” said Dr. Fink. For technical reasons, the function of these interneurons, if any, in motor behavior has remained elusive.

Dr. Fink and his colleagues identified a way to access this subset of interneurons genetically in mice and then devised approaches to manipulate their function in a selective manner. In one experiment, they activated presynaptic inhibitory interneurons optogenetically, decreasing the strength of sensory-motor transmission. They also ablated these interneurons by making them selectively sensitive to a lethal toxin, abolishing their control over sensory feedback strength. Without sensory feedback regulation, forelimb movements were dominated by severe oscillatory tremors, drastically diminishing motor accuracy.

This finding, along with parallel modeling studies, indicates that presynaptic inhibitory neurons normally adjust the “gain” of sensory feedback at synapses with motor neurons and are therefore crucial for the smooth execution of movement. Understanding how these basic microcircuits regulate sensory input and motor output may, in the long run, provide insight into ways to combat the movement instability and tremor seen in many neurological disorders.

“These two studies shed new light on how discrete classes of spinal interneurons empower the nervous system to direct motor behaviors in ways that match the particular task at hand,” said Dr. Jessell.

Dynorphin Acts as a Neuromodulator to Inhibit Itch in the Dorsal Horn of the Spinal Cord

Menthol and other counterstimuli relieve itch, resulting in an antipruritic state that persists for minutes to hours. However, the neural basis for this effect is unclear, and the underlying neuromodulatory mechanisms are unknown. Previous studies revealed that Bhlhb5−/− mice, which lack a specific population of spinal inhibitory interneurons (B5-I neurons), develop pathological itch. Here we characterize B5-I neurons and show that they belong to a neurochemically distinct subset. We provide cause-and-effect evidence that B5-I neurons inhibit itch and show that dynorphin, which is released from B5-I neurons, is a key neuromodulator of pruritus. Finally, we show that B5-I neurons are innervated by menthol-, capsaicin-, and mustard oil-responsive sensory neurons and are required for the inhibition of itch by menthol. These findings provide a cellular basis for the inhibition of itch by chemical counterstimuli and suggest that kappa opioids may be a broadly effective therapy for pathological itch.

Full Article

Spinal Stimulation Helps Four Patients with Paraplegia Regain Voluntary Movement

Four people with paraplegia are able to voluntarily move previously paralyzed muscles as a result of a novel therapy that involves electrical stimulation of the spinal cord, according to a study funded in part by the National Institutes of Health and the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation. The participants, each of whom had been paralyzed for more than two years, were able to voluntarily flex their toes, ankles, and knees while the stimulator was active, and the movements were enhanced over time when combined with physical rehabilitation. Researchers involved in the study say the therapy has the potential to change the prognosis of people with paralysis even years after injury.

“When we first learned that a patient had regained voluntary control as a result of spinal stimulation, we were cautiously optimistic,” said Roderic Pettigrew, Ph.D., M.D., director of the National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) at NIH, which provided support for the study. “Now that spinal stimulation has been successful in 4 out of 4 patients, there is evidence to suggest that a large cohort of individuals, previously with little realistic hope of any meaningful recovery from spinal cord injury, may benefit from this intervention.”

One of the most impressive and unexpected findings of the study is that two of the patients who benefited from the spinal stimulation had complete motor and sensory paralysis. In these patients, the pathway that sends information about sensation from the legs to the brain is disrupted, in addition to the pathway that sends information from the brain to the legs in order to control movement. The researchers were surprised by the outcome; they had assumed that at least some of the sensory pathway needed to be intact for the therapy to be effective.

Read more

Researchers generate new neurons in brains, spinal cords of living adult mammals

UT Southwestern Medical Center researchers created new nerve cells in the brains and spinal cords of living mammals without the need for stem cell transplants to replenish lost cells.

Although the research indicates it may someday be possible to regenerate neurons from the body’s own cells to repair traumatic brain injury or spinal cord damage or to treat conditions such as Alzheimer’s disease, the researchers stressed that it is too soon to know whether the neurons created in these initial studies resulted in any functional improvements, a goal for future research.

Spinal cord injuries can lead to an irreversible loss of neurons, and along with scarring, can ultimately lead to impaired motor and sensory functions. Scientists are hopeful that regenerating cells can be an avenue to repair damage, but adult spinal cords have limited ability to produce new neurons. Biomedical scientists have transplanted stem cells to replace neurons, but have faced other hurdles, underscoring the need for new methods of replenishing lost cells.

Scientists in UT Southwestern’s Department of Molecular Biology first successfully turned astrocytes – the most common non-neuronal brain cells – into neurons that formed networks in mice. They now successfully turned scar-forming astrocytes in the spinal cords of adult mice into neurons. The latest findings are published today in Nature Communications and follow previous findings published in Nature Cell Biology.

“Our earlier work was the first to clearly show in vivo (in a living animal) that mature astrocytes can be reprogrammed to become functional neurons without the need of cell transplantation. The current study did something similar in the spine, turning scar-forming astrocytes into progenitor cells called neuroblasts that regenerated into neurons,” said Dr. Chun-Li Zhang, assistant professor of molecular biology at UT Southwestern and senior author of both studies.

“Astrocytes are abundant and widely distributed both in the brain and in the spinal cord. In response to injury, these cells proliferate and contribute to scar formation. Once a scar has formed, it seals the injured area and creates a mechanical and biochemical barrier to neural regeneration,” Dr. Zhang explained. “Our results indicate that the astrocytes may be ideal targets for in vivo reprogramming.”

The scientists’ two-step approach first introduces a biological substance that regulates the expression of genes, called a transcription factor, into areas of the brain or spinal cord where that factor is not highly expressed in adult mice. Of 12 transcription factors tested, only SOX2 switched fully differentiated, adult astrocytes to an earlier neuronal precursor, or neuroblast, stage of development, Dr. Zhang said.

In the second step, the researchers gave the mice a drug called valproic acid (VPA) that encouraged the survival of the neuroblasts and their maturation (differentiation) into neurons. VPA has been used to treat epilepsy for more than half a century and also is prescribed to treat bipolar disorder and to prevent migraine headaches, he said.

The current study reports neurogenesis (neuron creation) occurred in the spinal cords of both adult and aged (over one-year old) mice of both sexes, although the response was much weaker in the aged mice, Dr. Zhang said. Researchers now are searching for ways to boost the number and speed of neuron creation. Neuroblasts took four weeks to form and eight weeks to mature into neurons, slower than neurogenesis reported in lab dish experiments, so researchers plan to conduct experiments to determine if the slower pace helps the newly generated neurons properly integrate into their environment.

In the spinal cord study, SOX2-induced mature neurons created from reprogramming of astrocytes persisted for 210 days after the start of the experiment, the longest time the researchers examined, he added.

Because tumor growth is a concern when cells are reprogrammed to an earlier stage of development, the researchers followed the mice in the Nature Cell Biology study for nearly a year to look for signs of tumor formation and reported finding none.

(Image: Shutterstock)

CC to the brain: How neurons control fine motor behavior of the arm

Motor commands issued by the brain to activate arm muscles take two different routes. As the research group led by Professor Silvia Arber at the Basel University Biozentrum and the Friedrich Miescher Institute for Biomedical Research has now discovered, many neurons in the spinal cord send their instructions not only towards the musculature, but at the same time also back to the brain via an exquisitely organized network. This dual information stream provides the neural basis for accurate control of arm and hand movements. These findings have now been published in “Cell”.

Movement is a fundamental capability of humans and animals, involving the highly complex interplay of brain, nerves and muscles. Movements of our arms and hands, in particular, call for extremely precise coordination. The brain sends a constant stream of commands via the spinal cord to our muscles to execute a wide variety of movements. This stream of information from the brain reaches interneurons in the spinal cord, which then transmit the commands via further circuits to motor neurons innervating muscles. The research group led by Silvia Arber at the Biozentrum of the University of Basel and the Friedrich Miescher Institute for Biomedical Research has now elucidated the organization of a second information pathway taken by these commands.

cc to the brain: one command – two directions

The scientists showed that many interneurons in the mouse spinal cord not only transmit their signals via motor neurons to the target muscle, but also simultaneously send a copy of this information back to the brain. Chiara Pivetta, first author of the publication, explains: “The motor command to the muscle is sent in two different directions – in one direction, to trigger the desired muscular contraction and in the other, to inform the brain that the command has actually been passed on to the musculature.” In analogy to e‑mail transmission, the information is thus not only sent to the recipient but also to the original requester.

Information to brainstem nucleus segregated by function

What happens to the information sent by spinal interneurons to the brain? As Arber’s group discovered, this input is segregated by function and spatially organized within a brainstem nucleus. Information from different types of interneurons thus flows to different areas of the nucleus. For example, spinal information that will influence left-right coordination of a movement is collected at a different site than information affecting the speed of a movement.

Fine motor skills supported by dual information stream

Arber comments: “From one millisecond to the next, this extremely precise feedback ensures that commands are correctly transmitted and that – via the signals sent back to the brain from the spinal cord – the resulting movement is immediately coordinated with the brain and adjusted.” Interestingly, the scientists only observed this kind of information flow to the brain for arm, but not for leg control. “What this shows,” says Arber, “is that this information pathway is most likely important for fine motor skills. Compared to the leg, movements of our arm and especially our hands have to be far more precise. Evidently, our body can only ensure this level of accuracy in motor control with constant feedback of information.”

In further studies, Silvia Arber’s group now plans to investigate what happens if the flow of information back to the brain is disrupted in specific ways. Since some interneurons facilitate and others inhibit movement, such studies could provide additional insights into the functionality of circuits controlling movement.

Long-term spinal cord stimulation stalls symptoms of Parkinson’s-like disease

Researchers at Duke Medicine have shown that continuing spinal cord stimulation appears to produce improvements in symptoms of Parkinson’s disease, and may protect critical neurons from injury or deterioration.

The study, performed in rats, is published online Jan. 23, 2014, in the journal Scientific Reports. It builds on earlier findings from the Duke team that stimulating the spinal cord with electrical signals temporarily eased symptoms of the neurological disorder in rodents.

"Finding novel treatments that address both the symptoms and progressive nature of Parkinson’s disease is a major priority," said the study’s senior author Miguel Nicolelis, M.D., Ph.D., professor of neurobiology at Duke University School of Medicine. "We need options that are safe, affordable, effective and can last a long time. Spinal cord stimulation has the potential to do this for people with Parkinson’s disease."

Parkinson’s disease is caused by the progressive loss of neurons that produce dopamine, an essential molecule in the brain, and affects movement, muscle control and balance.

L-dopa, the standard drug treatment for Parkinson’s disease, works by replacing dopamine. While L-dopa helps many people, it can cause side effects and lose its effectiveness over time. Deep brain stimulation, which emits electrical signals from an implant in the brain, has emerged as another valuable therapy, but less than 5 percent of those with Parkinson’s disease qualify for this treatment.

"Even though deep brain stimulation can be very successful, the number of patients who can take advantage of this therapy is small, in part because of the invasiveness of the procedure," Nicolelis said.

In 2009, Nicolelis and his colleagues reported in the journal Science that they developed a device for rodents that sends electrical stimulation to the dorsal column, a main sensory pathway in the spinal cord carrying information from the body to the brain. The device was attached to the surface of the spinal cord in rodents with depleted levels of dopamine, mimicking the biologic characteristics of someone with Parkinson’s disease. When the stimulation was turned on, the animals’ slow, stiff movements were replaced with the active behaviors of healthy mice and rats.

Because research on spinal cord stimulation in animals has been limited to the stimulation’s acute effects, in the current study, Nicolelis and his colleagues investigated the long-term effects of the treatment in rats with the Parkinson’s-like disease.

For six weeks, the researchers applied electrical stimulation to a particular location in the dorsal column of the rats’ spinal cords twice a week for 30-minute sessions. They observed a significant improvement in the rats’ symptoms, including improved motor skills and a reversal of severe weight loss.

In addition to the recovery in clinical symptoms, the stimulation was associated with better survival of neurons and a higher density of dopaminergic innervation in two brain regions controlling movement – the loss of which cause Parkinson’s disease in humans. The findings suggest that the treatment protects against the loss or damage of neurons.

Clinicians are currently using a similar application of dorsal column stimulation to manage certain chronic pain syndromes in humans. Electrodes implanted over the spinal cord are connected to a portable generator, which produces electrical signals that create a tingling sensation to relieve pain. Studies in a small number of humans worldwide have shown that dorsal column stimulation may also be effective in restoring motor function in people with Parkinson’s disease.

"This is still a limited number of cases, so studies like ours are important in examining the basic science behind the treatment and the potential mechanisms of why it is effective," Nicolelis said.

The researchers are continuing to investigate how spinal cord stimulation works, and are beginning to explore using the technology in other neurological motor disorders.

Findings Could Help Explain Origins of Human Limb Control

We might have more in common with a lamprey than we think, according to a new Northwestern University study on locomotion. At its core, the study of transparent zebrafish addresses a fundamental evolution issue: How did we get here?

Neuroscientists Martha W. Bagnall and David L. McLean have found that the spinal cord circuits that produce body bending in swimming fish are more complicated than previously thought.

Vertebrate locomotion has evolved from the simple left-right bending of the body exemplified by lampreys to the appearance of fins in bony fish to the movement of humans, with the complex nerve and muscle coordination necessary to move four limbs.

Bagnall and McLean report that differential control of an animal’s musculature — the basic template for controlling more complex limbs — is already in place in the spinal networks of simple fish. Neural circuits in zebrafish are completely segregated: individual neurons map to specific muscles.

Specifically, the neural circuits that drive muscle movement on the dorsal (or back) side are separate from the neural circuits activating muscles on the ventral (or front) side. This is in addition to the fish being able to separately control the left and right sides of its body [Video]

Ultimately, understanding more about how fish swim will allow scientists to figure out how humans walk.

“Evolution builds on pre-existing patterns, and this is a critical piece of the puzzle,” McLean said. “Our data help clarify how the transition from water to land could have been accomplished by simple changes in the connections of spinal networks.”

The findings will be published Jan. 10 in the journal Science. McLean, an assistant professor of neurobiology in the Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, and Bagnall, a postdoctoral fellow in his research group who made the discovery, are authors of the paper.

“This knowledge will put us in a better position to devise more effective therapies for when things go wrong with neural circuits in humans, such as spinal cord damage,” McLean said. “If you want to fix something, you have to know how it works in the first place. Given that the fish spinal cord works in a similar fashion to our own, this makes it a fantastic model system for research.”

McLean and Bagnall studied the motor neurons of baby zebrafish because the fish develop quickly and are see-through. They used state-of-art imaging techniques to monitor and manipulate neuronal activity in the fish.

“You can stare right into the nervous system,” McLean said. “It’s quite remarkable.”

The separate circuits for moving the left and right and top and bottom of the fish allow the animal to twist its body upright when it senses that it has rolled too far to one side or the other.

“This arrangement is perfectly suited to provide rapid postural control during swimming,” Bagnall said. “Importantly, this ancestral pattern of spinal cord organization may also represent an early functional template for the origins of limb control.”

Separate control of dorsal and ventral muscles in the fish body is a possible predecessor to separate control of extensors and flexors in human limbs. By tweaking the connections between these circuits as they elaborated during evolution, it is easier to explain how more complicated patterns of motor coordination in the limbs and trunk could have arisen during dramatic evolutionary changes in the vertebrate body plan, the researchers said.

“We are teasing apart basic components of locomotor circuits,” McLean said. “The molecular mechanisms responsible for building spinal circuits are conserved in all animals, so this study provides a nice hypothesis that scientists can test.”

Two-way traffic in the spinal cord

The progress a baby makes in the first year of life is amazing: a newborn can only wave its arms and legs about randomly, but not so long after the baby can reach out and pick up a crumb from the carpet. What happens in the nervous system that enables this change from random waving to finely coordinated movement? Scientists from the Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology in Martinsried near Munich, working with colleagues from New York and Philadelphia, have described a new type of nerve cell in mice which provides a valuable insight into this developmental phenomenon. During embryonic development, the projections from these cells grow from the spinal cord towards the brain. They may pave the way for other nerve cells which control voluntary movement and which only grow from the brain into the spinal cord after birth.

When we reach out towards an object with our hand or push our foot into a boot, our movements are coordinated and controlled by the brain. For this to be possible there must be a neural pathway for the brain to transmit instructions, for example to the foot; and also in the reverse direction, for stimuli from the surroundings of the foot to be passed back to the brain. Such neural pathways are formed when the projections (axons) grow out from nerve cells during development. Depending on the organism and the body part to be connected, the axons can grow to many centimetres in length. Rüdiger Klein and his team at the Max Planck Institute of Neurobiology investigate how the axons navigate through the body, and which molecules play a part in their pathfinding. In particular, the scientists have been focusing on the signalling molecules known as ephrins and their binding partners, the Eph receptors. Ephrins and Eph receptors are located on the surface of nerve cells, among other places, and help the growing cells find their way and locate their partner cells.

Some time ago, Rüdiger Klein and his team discovered in the mouse that ephrins and Eph receptors play a key role in the development of the neural networks which control our movements. The neurobiologists have been able to demonstrate that the ephrin/Eph system guides nerve cells which, after birth, send their axons from the brain into the spinal cord and direct voluntary movement in the arms and legs. In their investigations into axons which run in the opposite direction, namely from the spinal cord into the brain, the researchers came across a new cell type which also contained Eph receptors. “Just where the ‘descending’ axons were growing, we found the ‘ascending’ axons running in parallel”, says Rüdiger Klein. “That obviously raised the question in our minds as to how this parallel growth is controlled during development.”

Subsequent research by the neurobiologists uncovered something surprising: in contrast with the known cells, the ascending axons of the new cell type did not grow only after birth, but instead already during embryonic development. Moreover, their growth was guided by the same ephrin/Eph signalling system as that involved in the growth of the descending axons. “It would seem that during embryonic development the ascending axons would ‘pre-drill’ a channel for the descending axons which do not grow out until after birth”, explains Rüdiger Klein.

Further investigations into the new, ascending nerve cells have made it clear that they obtain their input from specialised, touch-sensitive cells. A new feedback system could thus be involved here: voluntary movements are refined by signals from touch-sensitive cells, so adapting the intended movement to the environment and your foot slips into the boot. “What we found surprising is the fact that one and the same guidance system directs both the descending and the ascending axons”, says Klein. “This is a wonderful example of how a highly complex nervous system can be built up by making flexible use of individual molecules, and thus a small number of genes.” The next job for the scientists is to find out whether the suspected feedback system actually exists, i.e. whether the ascending and descending cells are connected via synapses. Their aim is to unravel step by step the developmental processes which enable the brain to coordinate sequences of movements.