Literature DB >> 20884757

The central nervous system does not minimize energy cost in arm movements.

Dinant A Kistemaker1, Jeremy D Wong, Paul L Gribble.   

Abstract

It has been widely suggested that the many degrees of freedom of the musculoskeletal system may be exploited by the CNS to minimize energy cost. We tested this idea by having subjects making point-to-point movements while grasping a robotic manipulandum. The robot created a force field chosen such that the minimal energy hand path for reaching movements differed substantially from those observed in a null field. The results show that after extended exposure to the force field, subjects continued to move exactly as they did in the null field and thus used substantially more energy than needed. Even after practicing to move along the minimal energy path, subjects did not adapt their freely chosen hand paths to reduce energy expenditure. The results of this study indicate that for point-to-point arm movements minimization of energy cost is not a dominant factor that influences how the CNS arrives at kinematics and associated muscle activation patterns.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20884757     DOI: 10.1152/jn.00483.2010

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


  35 in total

1.  Evaluation of the minimum energy hypothesis and other potential optimality criteria for human running.

Authors:  Ross H Miller; Brian R Umberger; Joseph Hamill; Graham E Caldwell
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Reduction of metabolic cost during motor learning of arm reaching dynamics.

Authors:  Helen J Huang; Rodger Kram; Alaa A Ahmed
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Muscle coordination is habitual rather than optimal.

Authors:  Aymar de Rugy; Gerald E Loeb; Timothy J Carroll
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-05-23       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Spatially selective enhancement of proprioceptive acuity following motor learning.

Authors:  Jeremy D Wong; Elizabeth T Wilson; Paul L Gribble
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Optimizing effort: increased efficiency of motor memory with time away from practice.

Authors:  Sarah E Pekny; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  CONTROLLING PHYSICAL INTERACTIONS: HUMANS DO NOT MINIMIZE MUSCLE EFFORT.

Authors:  Ryan Koeppen; Dagmar Sternad; Meghan E Huber; Neville Hogan
Journal:  Proc ASME Dyn Syst Control Conf       Date:  2017-10

7.  Learning to be economical: the energy cost of walking tracks motor adaptation.

Authors:  James M Finley; Amy J Bastian; Jinger S Gottschall
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2012-12-17       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  Control of position and movement is simplified by combined muscle spindle and Golgi tendon organ feedback.

Authors:  Dinant A Kistemaker; Arthur J Knoek Van Soest; Jeremy D Wong; Isaac Kurtzer; Paul L Gribble
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  The cost of moving optimally: kinematic path selection.

Authors:  Dinant A Kistemaker; Jeremy D Wong; Paul L Gribble
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-06-18       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Influence of workspace constraints on directional preferences of 3D arm movements.

Authors:  Wanyue Wang; Natalia Dounskaia
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-04-26       Impact factor: 1.972

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.