Deep and superficial fibers of the lumbar multifidus muscle are differentially active during voluntary arm movements

AB Study Design. A cross-sectional study was conducted. Objective. To determine the activity of the deep and superficial fibers of the lumbar multifidus during voluntary movement of the arm. Summary of Background Data. The multifidus contributes to stability of the lumbar spine. Because the deep and superficial parts of the multifidus are near the center of lumbar joint rotation, the superficial fibers are well suited to control spine orientation, and the deep fibers to control intervertebral movement. However, there currently are limited in vivo data to support this distinction. Methods. Electromyographic activity was recorded in both the deep and superficial multifidus, transversus abdominis, erector spinae, and deltoid using selective intramuscular electrodes and surface electrodes during single and repetitive arm movements. The latency of electromyographic onset in each muscle during single movements and the pattern of electromyographic activity during repetitive movements were compared between muscles. Results. With single arm movements, the onset of electromyography in the erector spinae and superficial multifidus relative to the deltoid was dependent on the direction of movement, but the onset in the deep multifidus and transversus abdominis was not. With repetitive arm movements, peaks in superficial multifidus and erector spinae electromyography occurred only during flexion for most subjects, whereas peaks in deep multifidus electromyography occurred during movement in both directions. Conclusions. The deep and superficial fibers of the multifidus are differentially active during single and repetitive movements of the arm. The data from this study support the hypothesis that the superficial multifidus contributes to the control of spine orientation, and that the deep multifidus has a role in controlling intersegmental motion. (C) 2002 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

The coactivator-associated arginine methyltransferase is necessary for muscle differentiation - CARM1 coactivates myocyte enhancer factor-2

Studies with the myogenic basic helix-loop-helix and MADS box factors suggest that efficient transactivation is dependent on the recruitment of the steroid receptor coactivator (SRC) and the cofactors p300 and p300/CBP-associated factor. SRCs have been demonstrated to recruit CARM1 (coactivator-associated arginine methyltransferase-1), a member of the S-adenOSyl-L-methionine-dependent PRMTI-5 (protein-arginine N-methyltransferase-1-5) family, which catalyzes the methylation of arginine residues. This prompted us to investigate the functional role of CARM1/PRMT4 during skeletal myogenesis. We demonstrate that CARM1 and the SRC cofactor GRIP-1 cooperatively stimulate the activity of myocyte enhancer factor-2C (MEF2C). Moreover, there are direct interactions among MEF2C, GRIP-1, and CARM1. Chromatin immunoprecipitation demonstrated the in vivo recruitment of MEF2 and CARM1 to the endogenous muscle creatine kinase promoter in a differentiation-dependent manner. Furthermore, CARM1 is expressed in somites during embryogenesis and in the nuclei of muscle cells. Treatment of myogenic cells with the methylation inhibitor adenosine dialdehyde or tet-regulated CARM1 antisense expression did not affect expression of MyoD. However, inhibition of CARM1. inhibited differentiation and abrogated the expression of the key transcription factors (myogenin and MEF2) that initiate the differentiation cascade. This work clearly demonstrates that the arginine methyltransferase CARM1 potentiates myogenesis and supports the positive role of arginine methylation in mammalian differentiation.

The influence of a concurrent cognitive task on the compensatory stepping response to a perturbation in balance-impaired and healthy elders

This study investigated the influence of a concurrent cognitive task on the compensatory stepping response in balance-impaired elders and the attentional demand of the stepping response. Kinetic, kinematic and neuromuscular measures of a forward recovery step were investigated in 15 young adults, 15 healthy elders and 13 balance-impaired elders in a single task (postural recovery only) and dual task (postural recovery and vocal reaction time task) situation. Results revealed that reaction times were longer in all subjects when performed concurrently with a compensatory step, they were longer for a step than an in-place response and longer for balance-impaired older adults compared with young adults. An interesting finding was that the latter group difference may be related to prioritization between the two tasks rather than attentional demand, as the older adults completed the step before the reaction time, whereas the young adults could perform both concurrently. Few differences in step characteristics were found between tasks, with the most notable being a delayed latency and reduced magnitude of the early automatic postural response in healthy and balance-impaired elders with a concurrent task. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Does a reading lexicon provide orthographic representations for spelling?

University students spelled low-frequency words to dictation and subsequently made lexical decisions to them. In Experiment I, lexical decisions were slower on words students had spelled incorrectly relative to words they had spelled correctly, and there A as a larger repetition benefit 101 incorrectly spelled words. In experiment 2, the latency advantage for items spelled correctly was replicated when words were presented for only 200 ms and also in a spelling recognition task, In Experiment 3. masked identity and form priming effects were similar for words that had been spelled correctly and incorrectly, Item spelling accuracy tracked word frequency effects in the way chat it combined with repetition and priming effects. we inter that an individuals learning with a word's orthography underlies word frequency and item spelling accuracy effects and that a single orthographic lexicon serves visual word recognition and spelling. (C) 2000 Elsevier Science (USA).