Reversible deactivation of motor cortex reveals that areas in parietal cortex are differentially dependent on motor cortex for the generation of movement.

Abstract

Primates are characterized by specializations for manual manipulation, including expansion of posterior parietal cortex (PPC) and, in Catarrhines, evolution of a dexterous hand and opposable thumb. Previous studies examined functional interactions between motor cortex and PPC in New World monkeys and galagos, by inactivating M1 and evoking movements from PPC. These studies found that portions of PPC depend on M1 to generate movements. We now add a species that more closely resembles humans in hand morphology and PPC: macaques. Inactivating portions of M1 resulted in all evoked movements being reduced (28%) or completely abolished (72%) at the PPC sites tested (in areas 5L, PF, and PFG). Anterior parietal area 2 was similarly affected (26% reduced and 74% abolished) and area 1 was the least affected (12% no effect, 54% reduced, and 34% abolished). Unlike previous studies in New World monkeys and galagos, interactions between both nonanalogous (heterotopic) and analogous (homotopic) M1 and parietal movement domains were commonly found in most areas. These experiments demonstrate that there may be two parallel networks involved in motor control: a posterior parietal network dependent on M1 and a network that includes area 1 that is relatively independent of M1. Furthermore, it appears that the relative size and number of cortical fields in parietal cortex in different species correlates with homotopic and heterotopic effect prevalence. These functional differences in macaques could contribute to more numerous and varied muscle synergies across major muscle groups, supporting the expansion of the primate manual behavioral repertoire observed in Old World monkeys.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Motor cortex and anterior and posterior parietal cortex form a sensorimotor integration network. We tested the extent to which parietal areas could initiate movements independent of M1. Our findings support the contention that, although areas 2, 5L, PF, and PFG are highly dependent on M1 to produce movement, area 1 may constitute a parallel corticospinal pathway that can function somewhat independently of M1. A similar functional architecture may underlie dexterous tool use in humans.