Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Age-related differences in corticospinal excitability during a choice reaction time task

  • Published:
AGE Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Age-related declines in central processing may affect corticospinal (CS) excitability that underlies the emergence of voluntary responses to external stimuli. We used single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the primary motor cortex to explore the evolution of CS excitability in 14 young and ten elderly healthy right-handed participants. Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) were elicited in the right or left first dorsal interosseus (FDI) during the preparatory and premotor periods of a choice reaction time (CRT) task, which required selection of left or right index finger responses. Both age groups showed significant suppression of CS excitability in the preparatory period. However, suppression was generally less pronounced in older than in young adults. Moreover, our data indicated that a reduced suppression in the right FDI during the preparatory period was associated with longer reaction times (RTs) in older adults only. In the premotor period, both age groups demonstrated comparable facilitation levels towards movement onset. Our findings indicate that increased RTs among older individuals could be directly associated with declines in preparatory processes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adam JJ, Paas FG, Teeken JC, van Loon EM, van Boxtel MP, Houx PJ, Jolles J (1998) Effects of age on performance in a finger-precuing task. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 24:870–883

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bherer L, Belleville S (2004) Age-related differences in response preparation: the role of time uncertainty. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 59:66–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briggs SD, Raz N, Marks W (1999) Age-related deficits in generation and manipulation of mental images: I. The role of sensorimotor speed and working memory. Psychol Aging 14:427–435

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Burke JR, Kamen G (1995) Impairments of the response preparation process in the elderly. Int J Neurosci 81:177–192

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen R, Hallett M (1999) The time course of changes in motor cortex excitability associated with voluntary movement. Can J Neurol Sci 26:163–169

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen R, Yaseen Z, Cohen LG, Hallett M (1998) Time course of corticospinal excitability in reaction time and self-paced movements. Ann Neurol 44:317–325

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Clarkson PM (1978) The effect of age and activity level on simple and choice fractionated response time. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 40:17–25

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Crossley M, Hiscock M (1992) Age-related differences in concurrent-task performance of normal adults: evidence for a decline in processing resources. Psychol Aging 7:499–506

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Davranche K, Tandonnet C, Burle B, Meynier C, Vidal F, Hasbroucq T (2007) The dual nature of time preparation: neural activation and suppression revealed by transcranial magnetic stimulation of the motor cortex. Eur J Neurosci 25:3766–3774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duque J, Ivry RB (2009) Role of corticospinal suppression during motor preparation. Cereb Cortex 19:2013–2024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duque J, Murase N, Celnik P, Hummel F, Harris-Love M, Mazzocchio R, Olivier E, Cohen LG (2007) Intermanual differences in movement-related interhemispheric inhibition. J Cogn Neurosci 19:204–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duque J, Lew D, Mazzocchio R, Olivier E, Ivry RB (2010) Evidence for two concurrent inhibitory mechanisms during response preparation. J Neurosci 30:3793–3802

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Duque J, Labruna L, Verset S, Olivier E, Ivry RB (2012) Dissociating the role of prefrontal and premotor cortices in controlling inhibitory mechanisms during motor preparation. J Neurosci 32:806–816

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Falkenstein M, Yordanova J, Kolev V (2006) Effects of aging on slowing of motor-response generation. Int J Psychophysiol 59:22–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fujiyama H, Tandonnet C, Summers JJ (2011) Age-related differences in corticospinal excitability during a Go/NoGo task. Psychophysiology 48:1448–1455

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fujiyama H, Hinder MR, Schmidt MW, Garry MI, Summers JJ (2012a) Age-related differences in corticospinal excitability and inhibition during coordination of upper and lower limbs. Neurobiol Aging 33:1484–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fujiyama H, Hinder MR, Schmidt MW, Tandonnet C, Garry MI, Summers JJ (2012b) Age-related differences in corticomotor excitability and inhibitory processes during a visuomotor RT task. J Cogn Neurosci 24:1253–1263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gilio F, Curra A, Inghilleri M, Lorenzano C, Suppa A, Manfredi M, Berardelli A (2003) Abnormalities of motor cortex excitability preceding movement in patients with dystonia. Brain 126:1745–1754

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Golob EJ, Ovasapyan V, Starr A (2005) Event-related potentials accompanying motor preparation and stimulus expectancy in the young, young-old and oldest-old. Neurobiol Aging 26:531–542

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hasbroucq T, Kaneko H, Akamatsu M, Possamai CA (1997) Preparatory inhibition of cortico-spinal excitability: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study in man. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 5:185–192

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hasbroucq T, Osman A, Possamai CA, Burle B, Carron S, Depy D, Latour S, Mouret I (1999) Cortico-spinal inhibition reflects time but not event preparation: neural mechanisms of preparation dissociated by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Acta Psychol (Amst) 101:243–266

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hinder MR, Schmidt MW, Garry MI, Summers JJ (2010) Unilateral contractions modulate interhemispheric inhibition most strongly and most adaptively in the homologous muscle of the contralateral limb. Exp Brain Res 205:423–433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan TC, Rabbitt PM (1977) Response times to stimuli of increasing complexity as a function of ageing. Br J Psychol 68:189–201

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kujirai T, Caramia MD, Rothwell JC, Day BL, Thompson PD, Ferbert A, Wroe S, Asselman P, Marsden CD (1993) Corticocortical inhibition in human motor cortex. J Physiol 471:501–519

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Leocani L, Cohen LG, Wassermann EM, Ikoma K, Hallett M (2000) Human corticospinal excitability evaluated with transcranial magnetic stimulation during different reaction time paradigms. Brain 123(Pt 6):1161–1173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Levin O, Cuypers K, Netz Y, Thijs H, Nuttin B, Helsen WF, Meesen RL (2011) Age-related differences in human corticospinal excitability during simple reaction time. Neurosci Lett 487:53–57

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mills KR, Boniface SJ, Schubert M (1992) Magnetic brain stimulation with a double coil: the importance of coil orientation. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 85:17–21

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pascual-Leone A, Valls-Sole J, Wassermann EM, Brasil-Neto J, Cohen LG, Hallett M (1992) Effects of focal transcranial magnetic stimulation on simple reaction time to acoustic, visual and somatosensory stimuli. Brain 115(Pt 4):1045–1059

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peinemann A, Lehner C, Conrad B, Siebner HR (2001) Age-related decrease in paired-pulse intracortical inhibition in the human primary motor cortex. Neurosci Lett 313:33–36

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Proctor RW, Vu KP, Pick DF (2006) A deficit in older adults’ effortful selection of cued responses. J Mot Behav 38:265–284

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roggeveen AB, Prime DJ, Ward LM (2007) Lateralized readiness potentials reveal motor slowing in the aging brain. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 62:78–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossini PM, Desiato MT, Caramia MD (1992) Age-related changes of motor evoked potentials in healthy humans: non-invasive evaluation of central and peripheral motor tracts excitability and conductivity. Brain Res 593:14–19

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sailer A, Dichgans J, Gerloff C (2000) The influence of normal aging on the cortical processing of a simple motor task. Neurology 55:979–985

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Salthouse TA (2000) Aging and measures of processing speed. Biol Psychol 54:35–54

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair C, Hammond GR (2008) Reduced intracortical inhibition during the foreperiod of a warned reaction time task. Exp Brain Res 186:385–392

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair C, Hammond GR (2009) Excitatory and inhibitory processes in primary motor cortex during the foreperiod of a warned reaction time task are unrelated to response expectancy. Exp Brain Res 194:103–113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Soto O, Valls-Sole J, Kumru H (2010) Paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation during preparation for simple and choice reaction time tasks. J Neurophysiol 104:1392–1400

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sterr A, Dean P (2008) Neural correlates of movement preparation in healthy ageing. Eur J Neurosci 27:254–260

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Talelli P, Waddingham W, Ewas A, Rothwell JC, Ward NS (2008) The effect of age on task-related modulation of interhemispheric balance. Exp Brain Res 186:59–66

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tandonnet C, Burle B, Vidal F, Hasbroucq T (2003) The influence of time preparation on motor processes assessed by surface Laplacian estimation. Clin Neurophysiol 114:2376–2384

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tandonnet C, Garry MI, Summers JJ (2010) Cortical activation during temporal preparation assessed by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Biol Psychol 85:481–486

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tandonnet C, Garry MI, Summers JJ (2011) Selective suppression of the incorrect response implementation in choice behavior assessed by transcranial magnetic stimulation. Psychophysiology 48:462–469

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Touge T, Taylor JL, Rothwell JC (1998) Reduced excitability of the cortico-spinal system during the warning period of a reaction time task. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 109:489–495

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh DA (1976) Age differences in central perceptual processing: a dichoptic backward masking investigation. J Gerontol 31:178–185

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wassermann EM (1998) Risk and safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation: report and suggested guidelines from the international workshop on the safety of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, June 5–7, 1996. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 108:1–16

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yordanova J, Kolev V, Hohnsbein J, Falkenstein M (2004) Sensorimotor slowing with ageing is mediated by a functional dysregulation of motor-generation processes: evidence from high-resolution event-related potentials. Brain 127:351–362

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Flanders Fund for Scientific Research [G0483.10, G.A114.11] and Grant P7/21 from the Interuniversity Attraction Poles program of the Belgian federal government. Koen Cuypers is supported by the Special Research Fund UHasselt.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. BIOMED, Biomedical Research Institute, Hasselt University, Agoralaan, Building C, 3590, Diepenbeek, Belgium

    Koen Cuypers & Raf L. J. Meesen

  2. REVAL Research Institute, PHL University College, Agoralaan, Building A, 3590, Diepenbeek, Belgium

    Koen Cuypers & Raf L. J. Meesen

  3. Motor Control Laboratory, Research Center for Movement Control and Neuroplasticity, Group Biomedical Sciences, KU Leuven, Tervuursevest 101, 3001, Heverlee, Belgium

    Koen Cuypers, Stephan P. Swinnen, Oron Levin & Raf L. J. Meesen

  4. CENSTAT, Center for Statistics, Hasselt University, Agoralaan, Building D, 3590, Diepenbeek, Belgium

    Herbert Thijs

  5. Institute of Neuroscience, Université Catholique de Louvain, Avenue Mounier 53, 1200, Brussels, Belgium

    Julie Duque

Authors
  1. Koen Cuypers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Herbert Thijs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Julie Duque
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephan P. Swinnen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Oron Levin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Raf L. J. Meesen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raf L. J. Meesen.

Appendix

Appendix

Mixed model

Because of the correlation between data obtained from the same subject (over time and at different hemispheres), it was necessary to use a mixed model to estimate the rate of change (slopes) of CS excitability in the preparation and premotor periods as function of age (young vs. old), side (left vs. right hemisphere), and condition (selected vs. nonselected FDI).

Methods

A mixed model including fixed effects for AGE, SIDE, CONDITION, and TIME and their interactions was used to describe the rate of change in CS excitability. Averaged MEPs per subject, side, condition, and time point were entered into the model. A random intercept for SIDE was taken into account to correct for the correlation between both sides of the same individual. Furthermore, the repetition over time was handled by estimating the correlation of the measurements obtained from the same side within a single individual as a constant [compound symmetry − PROC MIXED (REML)]. Model fit was checked based on a graphical exploration of the residuals.

Results

From the estimates of the model (Table 4), the general slopes can be calculated per time point and for all combinations of side and age group. These slope estimates are shown in Table 6. A negative estimate indicates suppression, while a positive estimate corresponds with facilitation. Although the estimates at −400 ms and −300 ms and before the imperative signal (IS) show a slight facilitation, the estimates are not significant. Towards −200 ms and −100 ms before the IS and at the IS, the estimates are negative indicating suppression, which is strongly significant.

Table 4 Mixed model solutions for rates of change of CS excitability in the preparation period. Estimated mean (standard error) values are given in s−1. The results of the Type 3 statistics are added (Table 5)
Full size table
Table 5 Type 3 tests of fixed effects
Full size table
Table 6 Linear slopes for different groups
Full size table
Table 7 Differences between age groups and sides at all time points
Full size table

From Table 7, furthermore, differences can be investigated between both age groups and both sides at all time points. It can be noted that there is a consistent difference between the old and the young age groups at the right-hand side for all time points (p = 0.0008), while the left- and the right-hand side are different for the young subjects at all time points (p = 0.0142).

Table 8 Mixed model solutions for rates of change of CS excitability in the premotor period. Estimated mean (standard error) values are given in s−1. The results of the Type 3 statistics are added (Table 9)
Full size table

From the estimates shown in Table 8 above, the main conclusion is that the slope for the selected condition is strongly significant and positive indicating facilitation. With respect to the nonselected condition, it can be noted that only for the young age group, it is slightly significant and negative, indicating suppression, while the older show neither facilitation nor suppression.

Table 9 Type 3 tests of fixed effects
Full size table
Table 10 Differences in linear slopes for different groups
Full size table

Table 10 shows the differences between the old and the young age groups over all time points as well as the differences between both conditions. The main conclusion here is that between age groups, there is no significant difference, while both conditions are clearly strongly significant at all time points.

About this article

Cite this article

Cuypers, K., Thijs, H., Duque, J. et al. Age-related differences in corticospinal excitability during a choice reaction time task. AGE 35, 1705–1719 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-012-9471-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-012-9471-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation