Literature DB >> 16033938

Spatio-temporal separation of roll and pitch balance-correcting commands in humans.

C Grüneberg1, J Duysens, F Honegger, J H J Allum.   

Abstract

This study was designed to provide evidence for the hypothesis that human balance corrections in response to pitch perturbations are controlled by muscle action mainly about the ankle and knee joints, whereas balance corrections for roll perturbations are controlled predominantly by motion about the hip and lumbro-sacral joints. A dual-axis rotating support surface delivered unexpected random perturbations to the stance of 19 healthy young adults through eight different directions in the pitch and the roll planes and three delays between pitch and roll directions. Roll delays with respect to pitch were no delay, a short 50-ms delay of roll with respect to pitch movements, (chosen to correspond to the onset time of leg muscle stretch reflexes), and a long 150-ms delay between roll and pitch movements (chosen to shift the time when trunk roll velocity peaks to the time when trunk peak pitch velocity normally occurs). Delays of stimulus roll with respect to pitch resulted in delayed roll responses of the legs, trunk, arms, and head consistent with stimulus delay without any changes in roll velocity amplitude. Delayed roll perturbations induced only small changes in the pitch motion of the legs and trunk; however, major changes were seen in the time when roll motion of the trunk was arrested. Amplitudes and directional sensitivity of short-latency (SL) stretch reflexes in ankle muscles were not altered with increasing roll delay. Small changes to balance correcting responses in ankle muscles were observed. SL stretch reflexes in hip and trunk muscles were delayed, and balance-correcting responses in trunk muscles became split into two distinct responses with delayed roll. The first of these responses was small and had a directional responsiveness aligned more along the pitch plane. The main, larger, response occurred with an onset and time-to-peak consistent with the delay in trunk roll displacement and its directional responsiveness was roll oriented. The sum of the amplitudes of these two types of balance-correcting responses remained constant with roll delay. These results support the hypothesis that corrections of the body's pitch and roll motion are programmed separately by neural command signals and provide insights into possible triggering mechanisms. The evidence that lower leg muscle balance-correcting activity is hardly changed by delayed trunk roll also indicates that lower leg muscle activity is not predominant in correcting roll motion of the body. Lower leg and trunk muscle activity appears to have a dual action in balance corrections. In trunk muscles the main action is to correct for roll perturbations and the lesser action may be an anticipatory stabilizing reaction for pitch perturbations. Likewise, the small changes in lower leg muscle activity may result from a generalized stabilizing reaction to roll perturbations, but the main action is to correct for pitch perturbations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16033938     DOI: 10.1152/jn.00538.2004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurophysiol        ISSN: 0022-3077            Impact factor:   2.714


  17 in total

1.  The effect of voluntary arm abduction on balance recovery following multidirectional stance perturbations.

Authors:  Laura Grin; J Frank; John H J Allum
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-10-19       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Responses to multi-directional surface translations involve redistribution of proximal versus distal strategies to maintain upright posture.

Authors:  Stephanie L Jones; Sharon M Henry; Christine C Raasch; Juvena R Hitt; Janice Y Bunn
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Parallels in control of voluntary and perturbation-evoked reach-to-grasp movements: EMG and kinematics.

Authors:  William H Gage; Karl F Zabjek; Stephen W Hill; William E McIlroy
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-05-09       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Control of roll and pitch motion during multi-directional balance perturbations.

Authors:  Ursula Margareta Küng; C G C Horlings; F Honegger; J E J Duysens; J H J Allum
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Sensorimotor feedback based on task-relevant error robustly predicts temporal recruitment and multidirectional tuning of muscle synergies.

Authors:  Seyed A Safavynia; Lena H Ting
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Location specificity of plantar cutaneous reflexes involving lower limb muscles in humans.

Authors:  Tsuyoshi Nakajima; Masanori Sakamoto; Toshiki Tazoe; Takashi Endoh; Tomoyoshi Komiyama
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-07-18       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Differential control of abdominal muscles during multi-directional support-surface translations in man.

Authors:  Mark G Carpenter; Craig D Tokuno; Alf Thorstensson; Andrew G Cresswell
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-04-29       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Effect of canal plugging on quadrupedal locomotion in monkey.

Authors:  Bernard Cohen; Yongqing Xiang; Sergei B Yakushin; Mikhail Kunin; Theodore Raphan; Lloyd Minor; Charles C Della Santina
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 5.691

9.  Differences in coding provided by proprioceptive and vestibular sensory signals may contribute to lateral instability in vestibular loss subjects.

Authors:  John H J Allum; Lars B Oude Nijhuis; Mark G Carpenter
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-09-12       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Compensation following bilateral vestibular damage.

Authors:  Andrew A McCall; Bill J Yates
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2011-12-27       Impact factor: 4.003

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.