Literature DB >> 24056297

Kinematic markers dissociate error correction from sensorimotor realignment during prism adaptation.

Jacinta O'Shea1, Valérie Gaveau2, Matthieu Kandel2, Kazuo Koga3, Kenji Susami4, Claude Prablanc2, Yves Rossetti5.   

Abstract

This study investigated the motor control mechanisms that enable healthy individuals to adapt their pointing movements during prism exposure to a rightward optical shift. In the prism adaptation literature, two processes are typically distinguished. Strategic motor adjustments are thought to drive the pattern of rapid endpoint error correction typically observed during the early stage of prism exposure. This is distinguished from so-called 'true sensorimotor realignment', normally measured with a different pointing task, at the end of prism exposure, which reveals a compensatory leftward 'prism after-effect'. Here, we tested whether each mode of motor compensation - strategic adjustments versus 'true sensorimotor realignment' - could be distinguished, by analyzing patterns of kinematic change during prism exposure. We hypothesized that fast feedforward versus slower feedback error corrective processes would map onto two distinct phases of the reach trajectory. Specifically, we predicted that feedforward adjustments would drive rapid compensation of the initial (acceleration) phase of the reach, resulting in the rapid reduction of endpoint errors typically observed early during prism exposure. By contrast, we expected visual-proprioceptive realignment to unfold more slowly and to reflect feedback influences during the terminal (deceleration) phase of the reach. The results confirmed these hypotheses. Rapid error reduction during the early stage of prism exposure was achieved by trial-by-trial adjustments of the motor plan, which were proportional to the endpoint error feedback from the previous trial. By contrast, compensation of the terminal reach phase unfolded slowly across the duration of prism exposure. Even after 100 trials of pointing through prisms, adaptation was incomplete, with participants continuing to exhibit a small rightward shift in both the reach endpoints and in the terminal phase of reach trajectories. Individual differences in the degree of adaptation of the terminal reach phase predicted the magnitude of prism after-effects. In summary, this study identifies distinct kinematic signatures of fast strategic versus slow sensorimotor realignment processes, which combine to adjust motor performance to compensate for a prismatic shift.
© 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Error correction; Kinematics; Motor control; Prism adaptation; Proprioception

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24056297     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.09.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuropsychologia        ISSN: 0028-3932            Impact factor:   3.139


  15 in total

1.  Impaired visuomotor adaptation in adults with ADHD.

Authors:  Laura B F Kurdziel; Katherine Dempsey; Mackenzie Zahara; Eve Valera; Rebecca M C Spencer
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Induced sensorimotor cortex plasticity remediates chronic treatment-resistant visual neglect.

Authors:  Jacinta O'Shea; Patrice Revol; Helena Cousijn; Jamie Near; Pierre Petitet; Sophie Jacquin-Courtois; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Gilles Rode; Yves Rossetti
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 8.140

3.  Contributions of the cerebellum and the motor cortex to acquisition and retention of motor memories.

Authors:  David J Herzfeld; Damien Pastor; Adrian M Haith; Yves Rossetti; Reza Shadmehr; Jacinta O'Shea
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Visuomotor adaptation needs a validation of prediction error by feedback error.

Authors:  Valérie Gaveau; Claude Prablanc; Damien Laurent; Yves Rossetti; Anne-Emmanuelle Priot
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Optimal control of reaching is disturbed in complex regional pain syndrome: a single-case study.

Authors:  Michihiro Osumi; Masahiko Sumitani; Shin-Ichiro Kumagaya; Shu Morioka
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2017-01-12       Impact factor: 3.133

6.  Force field adaptation does not alter space representation.

Authors:  Carine Michel; Lucie Bonnetain; Sarah Amoura; Olivier White
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Kinematic changes in goal-directed movements in a fear-conditioning paradigm.

Authors:  Yuki Nishi; Michihiro Osumi; Masahiko Sumitani; Arito Yozu; Shu Morioka
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Dart Throwing with the Open and Closed Eyes: Kinematic Analysis.

Authors:  Alexey S Smirnov; Tatiana A Alikovskaia; Pavel N Ermakov; Pavel P Khoroshikh; Kirill A Fadeev; Alexander A Sergievich; Alexey V Tumialis; Kirill S Golokhvast
Journal:  Comput Math Methods Med       Date:  2019-11-19       Impact factor: 2.238

9.  Inter-task transfer of prism adaptation depends on exposed task mastery.

Authors:  Lisa Fleury; Damien Pastor; Patrice Revol; Ludovic Delporte; Yves Rossetti
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 10.  Towards a neuro-computational account of prism adaptation.

Authors:  Pierre Petitet; Jill X O'Reilly; Jacinta O'Shea
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 3.139

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.