Literature DB >> 21849613

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

Robert A Scheidt1, Claude Ghez, Supriya Asnani.   

Abstract

We examined elbow muscle activities and movement kinematics to determine how subjects combine elementary control actions in performing movements with one and two trajectory segments. In reaching, subjects made a rapid elbow flexion to a visual target before stabilizing the limb with either a low or a higher level of elbow flexor/extensor coactivity (CoA), which was cued by target diameter. Cursor diameter provided real-time biofeedback of actual muscle CoA. In reversing, the limb was to reverse direction within the target and return to the origin with minimal CoA. We previously reported that subjects overshoot the goal when attempting a reversal after first having learned to reach accurately to the same target. Here we test the hypothesis that this hypermetria results because reversals co-opt the initial feedforward control action from the preceding trained reach, thereby failing to account for task-dependent changes in limb impedance induced by differences in flexor/extensor coactivity as the target is acquired (higher in reaching than reversing). Instructed increases in elbow CoA began mid-reach, thus increasing elbow impedance and reducing transient oscillations present in low CoA movments. Flexor EMG alone increased at movement onset. Test reversals incorporated the initial agonist activity of previous reaches but not the increased coactivity at the target, thus leading to overshoot. Moreover, we observed elevated coactivity in reversals upon returning to the origin even though coactivity in reaching was centered at the goal target. These findings refute the idea that the brain necessarily invokes distinct unitary control actions for reaches and reversals made to the same target. Instead, reaches and reversals share a common control action that initiates trajectories toward their target and another later control action that terminates movement and stabilizes the limb about its final resting posture, which differs in the two tasks.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21849613      PMCID: PMC3214114          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00763.2010

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


  55 in total

1.  Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching.

Authors:  R L Sainburg; D Kalakanis
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Evidence for a dynamic-dominance hypothesis of handedness.

Authors:  Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2001-11-22       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Role of cocontraction in arm movement accuracy.

Authors:  Paul L Gribble; Lucy I Mullin; Nicholas Cothros; Andrew Mattar
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2003-01-22       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Handedness: dominant arm advantages in control of limb dynamics.

Authors:  Leia B Bagesteiro; Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Endpoint stiffness of the arm is directionally tuned to instability in the environment.

Authors:  David W Franklin; Gary Liaw; Theodore E Milner; Rieko Osu; Etienne Burdet; Mitsuo Kawato
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-07-18       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Damping of the wrist joint during voluntary movement.

Authors:  T E Milner; C Cloutier
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Muscle activation patterns during two types of voluntary single-joint movement.

Authors:  G L Gottlieb
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  The relationship between control, kinematic and electromyographic variables in fast single-joint movements in humans.

Authors:  A G Feldman; S V Adamovich; M F Levin
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model.

Authors:  T Flash; N Hogan
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  1985-07       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  The function of the antagonist muscle during fast limb movements in man.

Authors:  C D Marsden; J A Obeso; J C Rothwell
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 5.182

View more
  13 in total

Review 1.  Distinct neural circuits for control of movement vs. holding still.

Authors:  Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 2.714

Review 2.  Strategy of arm movement control is determined by minimization of neural effort for joint coordination.

Authors:  Natalia Dounskaia; Yury Shimansky
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Feedforward compensation for novel dynamics depends on force field orientation but is similar for the left and right arms.

Authors:  Eva-Maria Reuter; Ross Cunnington; Jason B Mattingley; Stephan Riek; Timothy J Carroll
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Visuo-proprioceptive interactions during adaptation of the human reach.

Authors:  Timothy Judkins; Robert A Scheidt
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  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

6.  The neural foundations of handedness: insights from a rare case of deafferentation.

Authors:  S A L Jayasinghe; F R Sarlegna; R A Scheidt; R L Sainburg
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-06-24       Impact factor: 2.974

7.  There and back again: putting the vectorial movement planning hypothesis to a critical test.

Authors:  Eva-Maria Kobak; Simone Cardoso de Oliveira
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 2.984

8.  Intention tremor and deficits of sensory feedback control in multiple sclerosis: a pilot study.

Authors:  Megan Heenan; Robert A Scheidt; Douglas Woo; Scott A Beardsley
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2014-12-19       Impact factor: 4.262

9.  Supplemental vibrotactile feedback control of stabilization and reaching actions of the arm using limb state and position error encodings.

Authors:  Alexis R Krueger; Psiche Giannoni; Valay Shah; Maura Casadio; Robert A Scheidt
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 4.262

10.  Coordinated alpha and gamma control of muscles and spindles in movement and posture.

Authors:  Si Li; Cheng Zhuang; Manzhao Hao; Xin He; Juan C Marquez; Chuanxin M Niu; Ning Lan
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 2.380

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.