{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.013683634373289545, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010946907498631637, 'mean_word_length': 5.671532846715328, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Differential modulation of descending signals from the reticulospinal system during reaching and locomotion.

We tested the hypothesis that the same spinal interneuronal pathways are activated by the reticulospinal system during locomotion and reaching. If such were the case, we expected that microstimulation within the pontomedullary reticular formation (PMRF) would evoke qualitatively similar responses in muscles active during both behaviors. To test this, we stimulated in 47 sites within the PMRF during both tasks. Stimulation during locomotion always produced a strongly phase-dependent, bilateral pattern of activity in which activity in muscles was generally facilitated or suppressed during one phase of activity (swing or stance) and was unaffected in the other. During reaching, stimulation generally activated the same muscles as during locomotion, although the modulation of the magnitude of the evoked responses was less limb dependent than during locomotion. An exception was found for some forelimb flexor muscles that were strongly facilitated by stimulation during the swing phase of locomotion but were not influenced by stimulation during the transport phase of the reach. We suggest that during locomotion the activity in interneuronal pathways mediating signals from the reticulospinal system is subject to strong modulation by the central pattern generator for locomotion. During reach, we suggest that, for most muscles, the same spinal interneuronal pathways are used to modify muscle activity but are not as strongly gated according to limb use as during locomotion. Finally, we propose that the command for movement during discrete voluntary movements suppresses the influence of the reticulospinal system on selected forelimb flexor muscles, possibly to enhance fractionated control of movement.