Key result
Sustained cycling exercise to volitional exhaustion did not significantly change motor evoked potentials or cervicomedullary evoked potentials (P > 0.05).
Why the study?
Does sustained cycling exercise increase motor cortex excitability in human subjects?
Does sustained cycling exercise increase motor cortex excitability in human subjects?
p-value: p=> 0.05
Unlike sustained single-joint contractions, sustained cycling exercise does not increase the excitability of motor cortical neurons.
Exhaustive cycling does not increase motor cortex excitability; leaves open differential effects versus single-joint contractions.
The excitability of the motor cortex increases as fatigue develops during sustained single-joint contractions, but there are no previous reports on how corticospinal excitability is affected by sustained locomotor exercise. Here we addressed this issue by measuring spinal and cortical excitability changes during sustained cycling exercise. Vastus lateralis (VL) and rectus femoris (RF) muscle responses to transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex (motor evoked potentials, MEPs) and electrical stimulation of the descending tracts (cervicomedullary evoked potentials, CMEPs) were recorded every 3 min from nine subjects during 30 min of cycling at 75% of maximum workload (W(max)), and every minute during subsequent exercise at 105% of W(max) until subjective task failure. Responses were also measured during nonfatiguing control bouts at 80% and 110% of W(max) prior to sustained exercise. There were no significant changes in MEPs or CMEPs (P > 0.05) during the sustained cycling exercise. These results suggest that, in contrast to sustained single-joint contractions, sustained cycling exercise does not increase the excitability of motor cortical neurons. The contrasting corticospinal responses to the two modes of exercise may be due to differences in their associated systemic physiological consequences.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sidhu et al. (2012) studied Fatigue during sustained locomotor exercise (n=9). Sustained cycling exercise vs. Nonfatiguing control bouts at 80% and 110% W(max) was evaluated on Changes in motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and cervicomedullary evoked potentials (CMEPs) (p=> 0.05). Sustained cycling exercise to volitional exhaustion did not significantly change motor evoked potentials or cervicomedullary evoked potentials (P > 0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: