Literature DB >> 25589591

Consequences of biomechanically constrained tasks in the design and interpretation of synergy analyses.

Katherine M Steele1, Matthew C Tresch2, Eric J Perreault2.   

Abstract

Matrix factorization algorithms are commonly used to analyze muscle activity and provide insight into neuromuscular control. These algorithms identify low-dimensional subspaces, commonly referred to as synergies, which can describe variation in muscle activity during a task. Synergies are often interpreted as reflecting underlying neural control; however, it is unclear how these analyses are influenced by biomechanical and task constraints, which can also lead to low-dimensional patterns of muscle activation. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether commonly used algorithms and experimental methods can accurately identify synergy-based control strategies. This was accomplished by evaluating synergies from five common matrix factorization algorithms using muscle activations calculated from 1) a biomechanically constrained task using a musculoskeletal model and 2) without task constraints using random synergy activations. Algorithm performance was assessed by calculating the similarity between estimated synergies and those imposed during the simulations; similarities ranged from 0 (random chance) to 1 (perfect similarity). Although some of the algorithms could accurately estimate specified synergies without biomechanical or task constraints (similarity >0.7), with these constraints the similarity of estimated synergies decreased significantly (0.3-0.4). The ability of these algorithms to accurately identify synergies was negatively impacted by correlation of synergy activations, which are increased when substantial biomechanical or task constraints are present. Increased variability in synergy activations, which can be captured using robust experimental paradigms that include natural variability in motor activation patterns, improved identification accuracy but did not completely overcome effects of biomechanical and task constraints. These results demonstrate that a biomechanically constrained task can reduce the accuracy of estimated synergies and highlight the importance of using experimental protocols with physiological variability to improve synergy analyses.
Copyright © 2015 the American Physiological Society.

Keywords:  decomposition; muscle synergy; musculoskeletal model; variability

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25589591      PMCID: PMC4416545          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00769.2013

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


  44 in total

1.  Mean-field approaches to independent component analysis.

Authors:  Pedro A d F R Højen-Sørensen; Ole Winther; Lars Kai Hansen
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 2.026

2.  Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination.

Authors:  Emanuel Todorov; Michael I Jordan
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 24.884

3.  Modular premotor drives and unit bursts as primitives for frog motor behaviors.

Authors:  Corey B Hart; Simon F Giszter
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2004-06-02       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  A model of the upper extremity for simulating musculoskeletal surgery and analyzing neuromuscular control.

Authors:  Katherine R S Holzbaur; Wendy M Murray; Scott L Delp
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.934

5.  Sequential activation of muscle synergies during locomotion in the intact cat as revealed by cluster analysis and direct decomposition.

Authors:  Nedialko Krouchev; John F Kalaska; Trevor Drew
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-07-05       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Matrix factorization algorithms for the identification of muscle synergies: evaluation on simulated and experimental data sets.

Authors:  Matthew C Tresch; Vincent C K Cheung; Andrea d'Avella
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2006-01-04       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Stability of muscle synergies for voluntary actions after cortical stroke in humans.

Authors:  Vincent C K Cheung; Lamberto Piron; Michela Agostini; Stefano Silvoni; Andrea Turolla; Emilio Bizzi
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2009-10-30       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  An information-maximization approach to blind separation and blind deconvolution.

Authors:  A J Bell; T J Sejnowski
Journal:  Neural Comput       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.026

9.  Coordination of locomotion with voluntary movements in humans.

Authors:  Yuri P Ivanenko; Germana Cappellini; Nadia Dominici; Richard E Poppele; Francesco Lacquaniti
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2005-08-03       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Identification of a cellular node for motor control pathways.

Authors:  Ariel J Levine; Christopher A Hinckley; Kathryn L Hilde; Shawn P Driscoll; Tiffany H Poon; Jessica M Montgomery; Samuel L Pfaff
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2014-03-09       Impact factor: 24.884

View more
  27 in total

1.  Long-term training modifies the modular structure and organization of walking balance control.

Authors:  Andrew Sawers; Jessica L Allen; Lena H Ting
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2015-10-14       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Motor primitives are determined in early development and are then robustly conserved into adulthood.

Authors:  Qi Yang; David Logan; Simon F Giszter
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-05-28       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Optimal motor synergy extraction for novel actions and virtual environments.

Authors:  Arran T Reader
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  Muscle synergies obtained from comprehensive mapping of the primary motor cortex forelimb representation using high-frequency, long-duration ICMS.

Authors:  Sommer L Amundsen Huffmaster; Gustaf M Van Acker; Carl W Luchies; Paul D Cheney
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  When 90% of the variance is not enough: residual EMG from muscle synergy extraction influences task performance.

Authors:  Victor R Barradas; Jason J Kutch; Toshihiro Kawase; Yasuharu Koike; Nicolas Schweighofer
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-04-08       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  On identifying kinematic and muscle synergies: a comparison of matrix factorization methods using experimental data from the healthy population.

Authors:  Navid Lambert-Shirzad; H F Machiel Van der Loos
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-11-16       Impact factor: 2.714

7.  Muscle Synergies Obtained from Comprehensive Mapping of the Cortical Forelimb Representation Using Stimulus Triggered Averaging of EMG Activity.

Authors:  Sommer L Amundsen Huffmaster; Gustaf M Van Acker; Carl W Luchies; Paul D Cheney
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2018-08-27       Impact factor: 6.167

8.  Synergies are minimally affected during emulation of cerebral palsy gait patterns.

Authors:  Alyssa M Spomer; Robin Z Yan; Michael H Schwartz; Katherine M Steele
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2022-01-10       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Reorganization of motor modules for standing reactive balance recovery following pyridoxine-induced large-fiber peripheral sensory neuropathy in cats.

Authors:  Aiden M Payne; Andrew Sawers; Jessica L Allen; Paul J Stapley; Jane M Macpherson; Lena H Ting
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-08-12       Impact factor: 2.714

10.  Muscle Synergies in Children Walking and Running on a Treadmill.

Authors:  Margit M Bach; Andreas Daffertshofer; Nadia Dominici
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 3.169

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.