% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Volz:203263,
      author       = {Volz, Lukas J. and Hamada, Masashi and Rothwell, John C.
                      and Grefkes, Christian},
      title        = {{W}hat {M}akes the {M}uscle {T}witch: {M}otor {S}ystem
                      {C}onnectivity and {TMS}-{I}nduced {A}ctivity},
      journal      = {Cerebral cortex},
      volume       = {25},
      number       = {9},
      issn         = {1460-2199},
      address      = {Oxford},
      publisher    = {Oxford Univ. Press},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2015-05244},
      pages        = {2346 - 2353},
      year         = {2015},
      abstract     = {Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) of the primary
                      motor cortex (M1) evokes several volleys of corticospinal
                      activity. While the earliest wave (D-wave) originates from
                      axonal activation of cortico-spinal neurons (CSN), later
                      waves (I-waves) result from activation of mono- and
                      polysynaptic inputs to CSNs. Different coil orientations
                      preferentially stimulate cortical elements evoking different
                      outputs: latero-medial-induced current (LM) elicits D-waves
                      and short-latency electromyographic responses (MEPs);
                      posterior–anterior current (PA) evokes early I-waves.
                      Anterior–posterior current (AP) is more variable and tends
                      to recruit later I-waves, featuring longer onset latencies
                      compared with PA-TMS. We tested whether the variability in
                      response to AP-TMS was related to functional connectivity of
                      the stimulated M1 in 20 right-handed healthy subjects who
                      underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging while
                      performing an isometric contraction task. The MEP-latency
                      after AP-TMS (relative to LM-TMS) was strongly correlated
                      with functional connectivity between the stimulated M1 and a
                      network involving cortical premotor areas. This indicates
                      that stronger premotor–M1 connectivity increases the
                      probability that AP-TMS recruits shorter latency input to
                      CSNs. In conclusion, our data strongly support the
                      hypothesis that TMS of M1 activates distinct neuronal
                      pathways depending on the orientation of the stimulation
                      coil. Particularly, AP currents seem to recruit short
                      latency cortico-cortical projections from premotor areas.},
      cin          = {INM-3},
      ddc          = {610},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)INM-3-20090406},
      pnm          = {572 - (Dys-)function and Plasticity (POF3-572)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-572},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000361464000002},
      pubmed       = {pmid:24610120},
      doi          = {10.1093/cercor/bhu032},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/203263},
}