Back

In vivo motor unit decoding and in vitro cellular characterisation of spinal circuits for urination in adult mice

Ozyurt, M. G.; Nascimento, F.; Pascual-Valdunciel, A.; Dhillon, K.; Bansal, V.; Brownstone, R. M.; Beato, M.

2026-03-17 neuroscience
10.64898/2026.03.13.711618 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Urinary dysfunction affects billions of individuals worldwide; however, the fundamental cellular and circuit properties that govern perineal motor control remain largely unknown, serving as a functional "black box". Here, we describe several methods that, when used in concert, characterise cellular, synaptic, and motor unit properties underlying the control of urination in adult mice. High-density electromyography combined with real-time cystometry were used to study external urethral sphincter (EUS) motor units, which follow a hierarchical ("onion skin") recruitment pattern during bladder filling. The transition to the voiding phase is marked by inhibition, followed by synchronised bursts. Furthermore, through concurrent recordings of ischiocavernosus (IC) muscles, the relationship between IC and EUS motor units could be studied to look for shared common inputs that could shed light on circuitry. Whole-cell patch-clamp recordings from retrogradely identified neurons revealed a fundamental biophysical divergence: urinary parasympathetic preganglionic neurons (PPGN) are significantly smaller and more excitable than somatic EUS and IC motoneurons and lack the recurrent excitatory and inhibitory circuits present in both EUS and IC motor pools. Finally, using a novel pressure-clamp preparation, we showed that acute tibial nerve stimulation (a widely used treatment for urinary dysfunction) evokes short-latency inhibition of EUS motor units. Collectively, these methods can be used to delineate patterns of motor unit recruitment, local recurrent microcircuit architecture, and distinct biophysical properties of the perineal motor system, providing mechanistic insights into urinary function.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.