Literature DB >> 26821319

Different damping responses explain vertical endpoint error differences between visual conditions.

Jan M Hondzinski1, Chelsea M Soebbing2, Allyson E French2, Sara A Winges2.   

Abstract

Upright people making goal-directed movements in dark environments often vertically undershoot remembered target locations when compared to performances in illuminated environments. In this study, we wanted to determine whether influences of the gravitational pull and/or type of muscle activation could explain differences in vertical endpoint precision between movements to visually remembered target locations with and without allocentric cues available. We also used a simple damping model for movement trajectories to describe potential differences in behavior between visual conditions. Subjects performed straight arm pointing movements to REAL target locations or remembered target locations in darkness (DARK) or normal room lighting (LIGHT). Performances were made from UPRIGHT and INVERTED (upside down) body orientations. Starting arm position (UP by the ear; DOWN on the thigh) also varied so that eccentric or concentric muscle contractions for arm flexion or extension movements occurred primarily along the earth-fixed vertical either with or against the gravitational pull. Effects of visual condition (LIGHT, DARK), body orientation (UPRIGHT, INVERTED), starting arm position (UP, DOWN), and target level (Near, Middle, Far) on elevation endpoint errors revealed that subject's errors in the DARK were more negative than those in the LIGHT. Errors correlated well with movement displacement to reveal the common vertical undershooting bias in darkness exacerbated by inverting the body or requiring greater movement excursions. Although influences of gravitational pull and muscle activation type could not explain differences between visual conditions, modeling revealed critically damped behavior in the DARK and under-damped behavior in the LIGHT to indicate muscle energy dissipation without vision.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Damping index; Gravitational pull; Kinesthesia; Proprioception; Vision

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26821319     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-015-4546-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  59 in total

1.  Role of eye, head, and shoulder geometry in the planning of accurate arm movements.

Authors:  D Y P Henriques; J D Crawford
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Similarity in the response of smooth pursuit and manual tracking to a change in the direction of target motion.

Authors:  K C Engel; J H Anderson; J F Soechting
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  The effect of target modality on visual and proprioceptive contributions to the control of movement distance.

Authors:  Fabrice R Sarlegna; Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Visuomotor memory for target location in near and far reaching spaces.

Authors:  Matthew Heath; Gordon Binsted
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 1.328

5.  Visuomotor transformations for reaching to memorized targets: a PET study.

Authors:  F Lacquaniti; D Perani; E Guigon; V Bettinardi; M Carrozzo; F Grassi; Y Rossetti; F Fazio
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Sympathetic and vascular responses to head-down neck flexion in humans.

Authors:  T L Shortt; C A Ray
Journal:  Am J Physiol       Date:  1997-04

7.  The influence of premovement visual information on manual aiming.

Authors:  D Elliott; J Madalena
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  1987-08

8.  Goal-directed arm movements in absence of visual guidance: evidence for amplitude rather than position control.

Authors:  O Bock; R Eckmiller
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 1.972

9.  Two cortical systems for reaching in central and peripheral vision.

Authors:  Jérôme Prado; Simon Clavagnier; Hélène Otzenberger; Christian Scheiber; Henry Kennedy; Marie-Thérèse Perenin
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2005-12-08       Impact factor: 17.173

10.  Multiple parietal reach regions in humans: cortical representations for visual and proprioceptive feedback during on-line reaching.

Authors:  Flavia Filimon; Jonathan D Nelson; Ruey-Song Huang; Martin I Sereno
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 6.167

View more
  2 in total

1.  Motor Planning of Vertical Arm Movements in Healthy Older Adults: Does Effort Minimization Persist With Aging?

Authors:  Gabriel Poirier; Charalambos Papaxanthis; France Mourey; Jeremie Gaveau
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 5.750

2.  A cross-species neural integration of gravity for motor optimization.

Authors:  Jeremie Gaveau; Sidney Grospretre; Bastien Berret; Dora E Angelaki; Charalambos Papaxanthis
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2021-04-07       Impact factor: 14.136

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.