Literature DB >> 1765795

Initiation rules for planar, two-joint arm movements: agonist selection for movements throughout the work space.

G M Karst1, Z Hasan.   

Abstract

1. The question we addressed was the following: what rules does the CNS employ, given the initial and final positions of the arm for a pointing movement, to decide which shoulder and elbow muscles ("agonists") to activate for initiating movement? 2. Widely varying initial and final positions were used, so that the movements studied encompassed much of the reachable work space within the horizontal plane. For each movement, the initial electromyographic (EMG) activity at each joint was classified qualitatively in terms of the "sign," i.e., flexor or extensor muscle activity, and quantitatively in terms of the integral of the rectified EMG. 3. The sign of initial muscle activity at each joint was found to be related to the angular excursions at both joints during movement to the final position. 4. Two different hypothesized rules, derived from previously proposed strategies for control of multijoint limb movements, were tested for their ability to predict correctly the sign of initial muscle activity at each joint. Although four variables are needed to describe the initial and final positions of a two-segment arm, only two combinations of these four were relevant for testing the rules. The two positional variables were the spatial direction of the final tip position with respect to the initial forearm orientation (psi) and the initial elbow angle (theta Einit). 5. According to one of the rules tested, which was based on statics, the initial muscle activity at each joint should be such that the distal tip of the limb exerts an initial force in the direction of the final tip position. Our data concerning the sign of initial shoulder muscle activity clearly contradicted this rule in two distinct regions of the (psi, theta Einit) plane. 6. According to the other rule tested, which was based on dynamics, the initial muscle activity at each joint should be such that the initial acceleration of the distal tip is in the direction of the final tip position. The data contradicted the predicted sign of initial shoulder muscle activity for a certain range of psi. This shows that the activation of muscles is not always appropriate even qualitatively for a straight-line path. Furthermore, the effects of added inertial loads predicted by this rule were not observed for trials in which a 1.8-kg mass was attached to the distal portion of the limb.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1765795     DOI: 10.1152/jn.1991.66.5.1579

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


  14 in total

1.  The time course for kinetic versus kinematic planning of goal-directed human motor behavior.

Authors:  Michael Vesia; Helena Vander; Xiaogang Yan; Lauren E Sergio
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-08-12       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Force path curvature and conserved features of muscle activation.

Authors:  J J Pellegrini; M Flanders
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Basic features of phasic activation for reaching in vertical planes.

Authors:  M Flanders; J J Pellegrini; S D Geisler
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Patterns of hypermetria and terminal cocontraction during point-to-point movements demonstrate independent action of trajectory and postural controllers.

Authors:  Robert A Scheidt; Claude Ghez; Supriya Asnani
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Patterns of coordinated multi-joint movement.

Authors:  P Haggard; K Hutchinson; J Stein
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Reaching to ipsilateral or contralateral targets: within-hemisphere visuomotor processing cannot explain hemispatial differences in motor control.

Authors:  D P Carey; E L Hargreaves; M A Goodale
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  The leading joint hypothesis for spatial reaching arm motions.

Authors:  Satyajit Ambike; James P Schmiedeler
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2012-12-11       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Accuracy of planar reaching movements. II. Systematic extent errors resulting from inertial anisotropy.

Authors:  J Gordon; M F Ghilardi; S E Cooper; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Accuracy of planar reaching movements. I. Independence of direction and extent variability.

Authors:  J Gordon; M F Ghilardi; C Ghez
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

10.  Selection of muscles for initiation of planar, three-joint arm movements with different final orientations of the hand.

Authors:  G F Koshland; Z Hasan
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.