Evaluation of the vestibular evoked myogenic potential during parabolic flight in humans

  • Hideo ShojakuEmail author
  • Yukio Watanabe
  • Masahito Tsubota
  • Naomi Katayama
Research Article


The purpose of this study was to investigate how gravity affects the vestibular evoked myogenic potential (VEMP). Eight healthy subjects (seven men, one woman; age range 19–45 years) participated in experiments in which three different gravity levels [microgravity (MG), normal gravity (NG), and hypergravity (HG)] were imposed during a parabolic flight procedure. The VEMP was evoked in response to an intense mono-aural click while the subjects kept the sternocleidomastoid (SCM) muscle contracted bilaterally. Background electromyographic activity of the SCM during the test was corrected. The p13–n23 amplitude was significantly greater under MG than under NG or HG. There was no difference in p13 latency between the three gravity levels. Possible mechanisms related to this phenomenon are discussed.


VEMP Parabolic flight Microgravity p13–n23 amplitude Saccule 



This research was supported by the Ground-Based Research Program for Space Utilization (#7-2004-ID#4) promoted by the Japan Space Forum. We thank Neal H. Barmack Ph.D., (Oregon Health Sciences University, Oregon, USA), for thoughtful comments on this manuscript.


  1. Colebatch JG, Halmagyi GM, Skuse NF (1994) Myogenic potentials generated by a click-evoked vestibulocollic reflex. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 57:190–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gerathewohl SJ (1975) Otolith functions in weightlessness. Life Sci Space Res 13:33–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Halmagyi GM, Colebatch JG, Curthoys IS (1994) New tests of vestibular function. Baillieres Clin Neurol 3:485–500PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Iurato S (1967) Submicroscopic structure of the inner ear. Pergamon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Lim CL, Clouston P, Sheean G, Yiannikas C (1995) The influence of voluntary EMG activity and click intensity on the vestibular click evoked myogenic potential. Muscle Nerve 18:1210–1213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. McCue MP, Guinan JJ Jr (1997) Sound-evoked activity in primary afferent neurons of a mammalian vestibular system. Am J Otol 18:350–355Google Scholar
  7. Murofushi T, Mazusaki M, Mizuno M (1998) Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials in patients with acoustic neuromas. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 124:509–512PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Shojaku H, Nagasaki M, Yasumura S, Zang RL, Akaogi K, Ito M, Watanabe Y (1996) Vestibular evoked myogenic potentials among dizzy patients. Equilib Res 56:354–359 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  9. Shojaku H, Takemori S, Kawana F, Seki Y, Watanbe Y, Mizukoshi K (2000) Clinical significance of the sound-evoked cervical myogenic potentials among dizzy patients. In: Claussen CF, Haid CT, Hofferberth B (eds) Equilibrium in research and clinical equilibriometry and modern treatment. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 223–228Google Scholar
  10. Wang CP, Hsu WC, Young YH (2005) Vestibular evoked potentials in neurofibromatosis 2. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol 114:69–73PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Watson SR, Fagan P, Colebatch JG (1998) Galvanic stimulation evokes short-latency EMG response in sternocleidomastoid which are abolished by selective vestibular nerve section. Electroenceph Clin Neurophysiol 109:471–474PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Welgampola MS, Colebatch JG (2005) Characteristics and clinical applications of vestibular-evoked myogenic potentials. Neurology 64:1682–1688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hideo Shojaku
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yukio Watanabe
    • 1
  • Masahito Tsubota
    • 1
  • Naomi Katayama
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of OtolaryngologyUniversity of ToyamaToyamaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Food Science and NutritionNagoya Woman’s UniversityNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations