Seeking functions for spinal recurrent inhibition

Abstract

In this issue of The Journal of Physiology, Lamy et al. (2008) describe a rhythmic modulation of recurrent inhibition during walking in man. This provides some insight into the function of recurrent inhibition, first described by Renshaw (1941) as an inhibition of cat motoneurones produced by antidromic stimulation of the axons of neighbouring motoneurones (homonymous action). Subsequent work, also in cats, showed that motor axon collaterals activate interneurones (the eponymous Renshaw cells) that in turn inhibit motoneurones. Actions extend to more distant muscle groups (heteronymous) and parallel the pattern of heteronymous monosynaptic excitation from muscle spindle Ia afferents. Renshaw cells receive peripheral sensory and descending inputs and have output connections to other spinal interneurones and to other Renshaw cells. So recurrent inhibition is more than just negative feedback from and to motoneurones and may have several functions depending upon motor context. Lamy et al. have focused on heteronymous actions (which are more widespread in man than in cats or monkeys) in the context of our unique bipedal form of walking. The knee extensor quadriceps is a source of recurrent inhibition to the ankle extensor and the flexor muscles soleus and tibialis anterior. But given that these ankle muscles are antagonists, how is differential activation achieved? The authors found that around heel strike and early in stance, when quadriceps is active and soleus activity is increasing, recurrent inhibition of soleus is weak. Conversely, later in stance, when quadriceps is active and soleus activity is declining, recurrent inhibition of soleus is strong. Recurrent inhibition of tibialis anterior motoneurones was neither task nor phase dependent. The reduction in soleus recurrent inhibition would assist the transition from swing to stance and enhanced inhibition later in stance would favour the transition from stance to swing by reducing reciprocal inhibition of tibialis anterior. The origin of these changes in recurrent inhibition remains uncertain but activity of peripheral sensory or descending motor pathways could be involved. Two interesting possibilities are the corticospinal pathway, known to depress homonymous recurrent inhibition of soleus in sitting subjects (Mazzocchio et al. 1994) and the vestibulospinal pathway that depresses recurrent inhibition of soleus in standing stance (Iles & Pisini, 1992). It might be possible to extend such studies to heteronymous actions in walking stance. More meticulous experiments built upon the framework of human research protocols pioneered by the Paris group will likely increase our understanding of recurrent inhibition even further.