Talk:Premovement neuronal activity

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to the physiology of the brain, nerves and nervous system.

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

pre-SMA should be defined when the term is first introduced NeuroJoe (talk) 17:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions

In your introduction, what do you mean by “Premovement activity is not thought to reflect a single parameter”?

In the Bereitschaftspotential section, you could mention the site specificity of this potential. I found a paper online by Hiroshi Shibasaki and Mark Hallett called What is the Bereitschaftpotential? that goes into detail about the early and late segments of BP and how they relate to the movement. I do not think you need to go that in depth, but the paper does a good job of explaining BP. It includes how BP phases differ depending upon the movement conditions and subjects. You write about the different phases of the readiness potential in the Parietal Area 5 section, but you do not relate it to the BP. This makes it a bit unclear and difficult to follow. The web address for the paper is http://keck.ucsf.edu/~houde/sensorimotor_jc/possible_papers/HShibasaki06a.pdf.

There is also a section in the paper that focuses on studies that have been performed that relate BP not only to voluntary muscle contraction but also muscle relaxation. You could include how premovement is similar and/or different when a muscle is being contracted versus when it is being relaxed.

You could also include a section that focuses on premovement neuronal activity in people with movement disorders such as Parkinson’s disease. You could even touch upon how this activity is altered in older people compared to younger people.

There are a lot of interesting studies that are being performed or have already been published concerning mirror motor neurons. There is one being conducted by Daniel Glaser that I found where it is believed that the same neurons that fire when we perform a movement also fire when we watch someone else perform the movement. This neuronal activity also shows variation depending upon what a person is skilled at as a result of practicing and repetition. You could include how premovement neuronal activity is altered from individual to individual depending upon what movements they have practiced repeatedly and mastered. For example, how is my neuronal activity different from a concert pianist’s if we were both to play the piano and have our brain activities recorded? The web site where I found this study is http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3204/01-resup.html.

You may also want to include a conclusion where you summarize premovement neuronal activity and even include where research in this area is moving.

Katie1341 (talk) 02:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It would be useful to go through the article one more type correcting for tense. There are many, and there should only be one. The section titled, "Organization of Primary Motor Cortex" should begin with an introduction before presenting Penfield's work. A more detailed description of neuron layers in the section would also be useful for a more complete understanding of the information presented. I think it would be helpful to the coherence of the article to rearrange the sections somewhat, perhaps starting with a more detailed introduction, then outlining the various experiments that led to understanding of premovement neuronal activity as subsections of a larger "Research" section. Adding transitions that explain how each area is related to the others would also serve to unify the article, which currently feels a little scattered. There is a lot of very interesting information here, it just needs to be better organized. Matthew Cedar Warman (talk) 18:18, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Under the "Closed-loop" motor tasks vs. "Open-loop" motor tasks section, it states that there is a visual cue presented to the monkey and then an actual signal. You may want to give an example of this so that it is clear what is a "cue" and a "signal." Also, I found an article called "Comparison of the Neuronal Activity in the SMA and the Ventral Cingulate Cortex During Prehension in the Monkey" by Geneviève Cadoret and Allan M. Smith that could give more insight on how experiments were performed with monkeys and the methods that they used. Gandhi7 (talk) 19:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very interesting topic and a good article. To help readers understand the importance of pre-movement, include a diagram of the parts of the brain that are involved, or describe the SMA (or just include that it stands for supplementary motor area when it is first mentioned in the article). Also include links to various other wiki sites (like SMA). If you have the information, go into more depth on the hypotheses for the cause of BP. I know that this is only one aspect of your article, but comparing the three hypotheses may make it more clear as to why they are individually significant.
In the closed-loop section, it is stated: "appropriately coordinated lateral pre motor neurons begin to fire at the appearance of that specified cue, but way before the actual signal to perform the movement." does the source used for this information explain how long of a delay is observed between appearance of the cue and performance of the movement, or show a rate of the shortening of this gap as the individual learns?
In the last section, instead of "they found", say "it was found that.." or mention the specific study.
I found an article (actually a full PDF) about premovement neuronal activity in cats. The study compares self-initiated and stimulus-initiated movements and provides times and graphs of the results. This might not add a ton of info to the article, but may allow you to use more sources on a couple of the sections. Pre-movement activity of neurons in the parietal associative cortex of the cat during different types of voluntary movement" by T. V. Khitrova-Orlova, V. G. Sidyakin, A. M. Kulichenko and V. B. Pavlenko. http://www.springerlink.com/content/95123tnn800h4531/. Another full article that may be of use to you is about the importance of SMA to premovement and BP - "Premovement activity of the pre-supplementary motor area and the readiness for action: Studies of time-resolved event-related functional MRI" by Ross Cunnington, Christian Windischbergerb,and Ewald Moser. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V8T-4HRDXV9-5&_user=521319&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1114266656&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000026018&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=521319&md5=ba1f1c6407137e9d12d9b03916c12c4b.

Bellamen (talk) 20:38, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Classmates!

This is a very interesting topic and you have a lot of good information in your article! Great job! I was very interested while reading it. I would suggest that you reread it for grammar corrections-for instance verb tense agreement-I believe conventionally we are supposed to use present tense- and also plural vs. singular agreement; keeping that consistent will allow the article to "flow" better. I am not sure about the bullets for the section under "Regions of the Brain involved in Pre-movement"- I think written sentences explaining each part would be more effective, the bullets seem incomplete. Maybe use an example for each, such as "timing of movement" could be running when the gun fires or something, just a minor suggestion.

In the "Organization of Primary Movement" paragraph the sentence "Neurons at different locations on the motor map are connected for the purpose of generating specific movements rather than generating specific muscle movements or contractions." was a little unclear to me. I think it would be useful for this section to expand on this or try explaining it a different way. Also the section could use more detail about "organization". I found the "experiments" part to be more informative-maybe finding more information on that experiment: the researchers involved, the experiment conducted, trials, controls, etc... This could help expand the idea.

The section on closed-looped and open-looped tasks is well written. To help you expand on this concept, I found an article on BC's online database titled: "Role of primate basal ganglia and frontal cortex in the internal generation of movements: Neuronal activity in the supplementary motor area" by Ranulfo Romo. Here is the link: "http://databases.bc.edu/V/EDC6NKKNRX32B5AGYJCMPN3LIUESYYER69DV63C2A95FMHGMGG-05105?func=meta-3&short-format=002&set_number=002431&set_entry=000011&format=999. Unfortunately the article is not online, but you can request it through the Interlibrary Loan service. The article is a based on an experiment on monkey's to test time-locked movement. Another article titled "Putaminal Activity for Simple Reactions or Self-Timed Movements" by Irwin H. Lee and John A may also be of good use to you. This is the link: http://jn.physiology.org/cgi/reprint/89/5/2528, you can find the article in the Journal of Neurophysiology . It also focuses on timed-movements which I found to be an important topic under Premovement neuronal activity. You could expand on this in your article.

Final suggestion is to add pictures! I know its hard to find many considering you want to be sure you have permission from the Copyright owner but that would really help reader conceptualize this highly specific subject!

I hope my comments are useful to you as you continue your research for final submission! Good luck and great job! Fdemsas (talk) 21:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your article is well written and informative. I think I may have found a typo in second sentence of the BP section – PB is written where I believe you meant to write BP. In the "Regions of the Brain Involved" and the "BP" sections the pre-SMA cortex and the SMA proper are mentioned but SMA is not identified until the last section of text (Lead changes). Incorporating the identification of that brain region earlier in the article may make it easier to follow. I also agree that this article can be improved by the addition of pictures. I found an article that has some EEG and MRI results that may be included in your article. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V8T-4HRDXV9-5&_user=521319&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1114381133&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000026018&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=521319&md5=5b2e73bfc55a873cb4c4717e570b6435 Hope I helped! KrystalMarquis (talk) 23:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article should be re-read for some minor editing problems, verb tenses and whatnot, but that's discussed above. The comment right above me provides some good pictures that would definitely help to break up the article. I recommend looking in your type, or finding ways to add, links to other wikipedia articles. For example, when you mention pre-synaptic neurons, you could link to the chemical synapse article, this will break up the text a little bit and also allow users to get more information who may just be looking up this subject with little prior knowledge. Breaking down your topics into other subheadings could help too, right now it kind of seems like a large number of blocks of seperate information with just one citation per section. Things could possibly be condensed, or filtered into more general topics. Adding pictures could help to alleviate this problem too. Watch your antecedents too, make sure your pro-nouns are clearly matching up with another section. You have a lot of good information, and the information above is great as well, the key is to just organize it in a logical and concise way. Maybe chronologically based on discovery or another method. Great and interesting information though! Jaykloo (talk) 11:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great work! Your topic is very interesting and generally easy to read. I especially like the section "Regions of the brain involved in pre-movement"; it is broken down for simple understanding. I would suggest proofing your article for grammatical errors. Additionally, some reorganization may help the article flow better. I like the subcategories you have in the first sections of the article. maybe consider breaking down the latter parts of the article in a similar fashion. Finally, if you can find copyrighted photos for use, the use of graphics may help to make a stronger article. Overall, fantastic job! marissa.hone (talk) 12:59, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We did not include pictures on our page because many of the wikipedia articles we link to in our article show the region of the brain being discussed or we could not get the rights to post the pictures we wanted to for the project.
We did not address the comment relating to contracted vs relaxed muscles because we felt it dealt more with the actual movement a person does, not premovement. We also could not find articles that directly addressed the issues of muscle contraction versus relaxation and the role premovement neuronal activity plays in that difference, so we chose not to address that issue in our article, as we did not feel it would enhance our article.
We chose not to re-arrange our sections because after incorporating more sources, information, and new sections to our article, we felt the way it was set up was the best. We started with the BP and ended with the movement disorders because experiments and studies done relating to the BP occurred prior to studies for many of the other sections and the studies on movement disorders have occured more recently. Overall, we decided to keep the original because it best reflected the articles we found to explain what exactly premovement neuronal activity is and how it relates to certain areas of the brain and certain disorders.
We chose to keep the bullets due to conflicting comments about them, and while writing out that section, the resulting sentences seemed awkward, so we decided the clearest way to get that information across was to keep the bullets.
We chose not to address the neuron layers in our final article because we found the information to be extremely complex it would have madem the article confusing. Thus, we chose to leave it out in the end. Widrickm (talk) 16:48, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]