Literature DB >> 15448958

Strategies and determinants for selection of alternate foot placement during human locomotion: influence of spatial and temporal constraints.

Renato Moraes1, M Anthony Lewis, Aftab E Patla.   

Abstract

During locomotion in a cluttered terrain, certain terrain surfaces such as an icy one are not appropriate for foot placement; an alternate choice is required. In a previous study we showed that the selection of foot placement is not random but systematic; the dominant choices made are not uniquely defined by the available or predicted sensory inputs. We argued that selection is guided by specific rules and involves minimal displacement of the foot from its normal landing spot. The experimental protocol involved implicit spatial constraint by requiring individuals to step on the force plate that could trigger a lighted area to be avoided, thereby requiring individuals to respond within one step-cycle. Alternate foot placement was visually identified, but not measured. The purpose of this study was to directly measure foot placement, validate and/or refine the rules used to guide selection, and identify whether the alternate foot placement choices are influenced by spatial and temporal constraints on response selection. The area to be avoided was visible from the start and therefore individuals could plan and implement appropriate avoidance strategies without any temporal constraint. Spatial constraint introduced in this experiment included requirement both to step on a specific location and to avoid stepping on a specific location on the next step. The results provide support for the rules previously identified in guiding foot placement to an alternate location. Minimal displacement of the foot from its normal landing spot was validated as an important factor for selecting alternate foot placement. When several choices satisfied this factor, additional factors guide alternate foot placement. Modifications in the plane of progression are preferred while stepping wide is avoided. When no temporal constraints are imposed on the response selection, enhancing forward progression of the body becomes the dominant determinant followed by stability and lastly by energy costs associated with the modifications. A decision algorithm for selecting foot placement is proposed based on these findings. It is clear that while visual input plays a critical role in guiding foot placement, it is not entirely based on reactive control. This has implications for implementing visually guided adaptive locomotion in legged robots.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15448958     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-004-1888-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  5 in total

1.  A perception-action coupling type of control in long jumping.

Authors:  G Montagne; S Cornus; D Glize; F Quaine
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 1.328

2.  What guides the selection of alternate foot placement during locomotion in humans.

Authors:  A E Patla; S D Prentice; S Rietdyk; F Allard; C Martin
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Mechanical and metabolic determinants of the preferred step width in human walking.

Authors:  J M Donelan; R Kram; A D Kuo
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2001-10-07       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  Active control of lateral balance in human walking.

Authors:  C E Bauby; A D Kuo
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 2.712

5.  Perception--action coupling model for human locomotor pointing.

Authors:  A de Rugy; G Taga; G Montagne; M J Buekers; M Laurent
Journal:  Biol Cybern       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 2.086

  5 in total
  18 in total

1.  Known and unexpected constraints evoke different kinematic, muscle, and motor cortical neuron responses during locomotion.

Authors:  Erik E Stout; Mikhail G Sirota; Irina N Beloozerova
Journal:  Eur J Neurosci       Date:  2015-10-24       Impact factor: 3.386

2.  Determinants guiding alternate foot placement selection and the behavioral responses are similar when avoiding a real or a virtual obstacle.

Authors:  Renato Moraes; Aftab E Patla
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-12-21       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Goal-related planning constraints in bimanual grasping and placing of objects.

Authors:  Charmayne M L Hughes; Elizabeth A Franz
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-04-29       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Strategies for obstacle avoidance during walking in the cat.

Authors:  Kevin M I Chu; Sandy H Seto; Irina N Beloozerova; Vladimir Marlinski
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 5.  Online adjustments of leg movements in healthy young and old.

Authors:  Zrinka Potocanac; Jacques Duysens
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-05-06       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Effect of a cognitive task on online adjustments when avoiding stepping on an obstacle and stepping on a target during walking in young adults.

Authors:  Andréia Abud da Silva Costa; Luciana Oliveira Dos Santos; Renato Moraes
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-06-14       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Split-second decisions on a split belt: does simulated limping affect obstacle avoidance?

Authors:  Jacques Duysens; Zrinka Potocanac; Judith Hegeman; Sabine Verschueren; Bradford J McFadyen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-09-02       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Reaching for the Unreachable: Reorganization of Reaching with Walking.

Authors:  Beata J Grzyb; Linda B Smith; Angel P Del Pobil
Journal:  IEEE Trans Auton Ment Dev       Date:  2013-06

9.  Walking through an aperture with visual information obtained at a distance.

Authors:  Daisuke Muroi; Takahiro Higuchi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Fast online corrections of tripping responses.

Authors:  Zrinka Potocanac; Janneke de Bruin; Susanne van der Veen; Sabine Verschueren; Jaap van Dieën; Jacques Duysens; Mirjam Pijnappels
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-07-29       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.