Literature DB >> 25436672

Grasping with the Press of a Button: Grasp-selective Responses in the Human Anterior Intraparietal Sulcus Depend on Nonarbitrary Causal Relationships between Hand Movements and End-effector Actions.

Scott H Frey1, Marc Hansen, Noah Marchal.   

Abstract

Evidence implicates ventral parieto-premotor cortices in representing the goal of grasping independent of the movements or effectors involved [Umilta, M. A., Escola, L., Intskirveli, I., Grammont, F., Rochat, M., Caruana, F., et al. When pliers become fingers in the monkey motor system. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, U.S.A., 105, 2209-2213, 2008; Tunik, E., Frey, S. H., & Grafton, S. T. Virtual lesions of the anterior intraparietal area disrupt goal-dependent on-line adjustments of grasp. Nature Neuroscience, 8, 505-511, 2005]. Modern technologies that enable arbitrary causal relationships between hand movements and tool actions provide a strong test of this hypothesis. We capitalized on this unique opportunity by recording activity with fMRI during tasks in which healthy adults performed goal-directed reach and grasp actions manually or by depressing buttons to initiate these same behaviors in a remotely located robotic arm (arbitrary causal relationship). As shown previously [Binkofski, F., Dohle, C., Posse, S., Stephan, K. M., Hefter, H., Seitz, R. J., et al. Human anterior intraparietal area subserves prehension: A combined lesion and functional MRI activation study. Neurology, 50, 1253-1259, 1998], we detected greater activity in the vicinity of the anterior intraparietal sulcus (aIPS) during manual grasp versus reach. In contrast to prior studies involving tools controlled by nonarbitrarily related hand movements [Gallivan, J. P., McLean, D. A., Valyear, K. F., & Culham, J. C. Decoding the neural mechanisms of human tool use. Elife, 2, e00425, 2013; Jacobs, S., Danielmeier, C., & Frey, S. H. Human anterior intraparietal and ventral premotor cortices support representations of grasping with the hand or a novel tool. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 2594-2608, 2010], however, responses within the aIPS and premotor cortex exhibited no evidence of selectivity for grasp when participants employed the robot. Instead, these regions showed comparable increases in activity during both the reach and grasp conditions. Despite equivalent sensorimotor demands, the right cerebellar hemisphere displayed greater activity when participants initiated the robot's actions versus when they pressed a button known to be nonfunctional and watched the very same actions undertaken autonomously. This supports the hypothesis that the cerebellum predicts the forthcoming sensory consequences of volitional actions [Blakemore, S. J., Frith, C. D., & Wolpert, D. M. The cerebellum is involved in predicting the sensory consequences of action. NeuroReport, 12, 1879-1884, 2001]. We conclude that grasp-selective responses in the human aIPS and premotor cortex depend on the existence of nonarbitrary causal relationships between hand movements and end-effector actions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25436672      PMCID: PMC4853885          DOI: 10.1162/jocn_a_00766

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci        ISSN: 0898-929X            Impact factor:   3.225


  76 in total

1.  The cerebellum is involved in predicting the sensory consequences of action.

Authors:  S J Blakemore; C D Frith; D M Wolpert
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2001-07-03       Impact factor: 1.837

2.  Improved optimization for the robust and accurate linear registration and motion correction of brain images.

Authors:  Mark Jenkinson; Peter Bannister; Michael Brady; Stephen Smith
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Neural representations involved in observed, imagined, and imitated actions are dissociable and hierarchically organized.

Authors:  Kristen L Macuga; Scott H Frey
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2011-10-08       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Intratask and intertask asymmetry analysis of motor function.

Authors:  Lirong Yan; Daxing Wu; Xiang Wang; Zongtan Zhou; Yadong Liu; Shuqiao Yao; Dewen Hu
Journal:  Neuroreport       Date:  2006-07-31       Impact factor: 1.837

5.  Grasping neurons of monkey parietal and premotor cortices encode action goals at distinct levels of abstraction during complex action sequences.

Authors:  Luca Bonini; Francesca Ugolotti Serventi; Luciano Simone; Stefano Rozzi; Pier Francesco Ferrari; Leonardo Fogassi
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2011-04-13       Impact factor: 6.167

6.  Internal models in the cerebellum.

Authors:  D M Wolpert; R C Miall; M Kawato
Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci       Date:  1998-09-01       Impact factor: 20.229

7.  Functional organization of inferior area 6 in the macaque monkey. II. Area F5 and the control of distal movements.

Authors:  G Rizzolatti; R Camarda; L Fogassi; M Gentilucci; G Luppino; M Matelli
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  A distinct role of the temporal-parietal junction in predicting socially guided decisions.

Authors:  R McKell Carter; Daniel L Bowling; Crystal Reeck; Scott A Huettel
Journal:  Science       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 47.728

Review 9.  The cortical control of visually guided grasping.

Authors:  Umberto Castiello; Chiara Begliomini
Journal:  Neuroscientist       Date:  2008-01-24       Impact factor: 7.519

10.  FMRI responses to video and point-light displays of moving humans and manipulable objects.

Authors:  Michael S Beauchamp; Kathryn E Lee; James V Haxby; Alex Martin
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 3.225

View more
  4 in total

1.  Grasping performance depends upon the richness of hand feedback.

Authors:  Prajith Sivakumar; Derek J Quinlan; Kevin M Stubbs; Jody C Culham
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  The organization of the posterior parietal cortex devoted to upper limb actions: An fMRI study.

Authors:  Stefania Ferri; Giacomo Rizzolatti; Guy A Orban
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-06-30       Impact factor: 5.038

3.  Delay and Speed of Visual Feedback of a Keystroke Cause Illusory Heaviness and Stiffness.

Authors:  Takumi Yokosaka; Takahiro Kawabe
Journal:  Front Neurosci       Date:  2022-03-18       Impact factor: 4.677

Review 4.  The contributions of vision and haptics to reaching and grasping.

Authors:  Kayla D Stone; Claudia L R Gonzalez
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-09-16
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.