Literature DB >> 28768744

The temporal stability of visuomotor adaptation generalization.

Weiwei Zhou1, Justin Fitzgerald1, Katrina Colucci-Chang1, Karthik G Murthy1, Wilsaan M Joiner2,3,4.   

Abstract

Movement adaptation in response to systematic motor perturbations exhibits distinct spatial and temporal properties. These characteristics are typically studied in isolation, leaving the interaction largely unknown. Here we examined how the temporal decay of visuomotor adaptation influences the spatial generalization of the motor recalibration. First, we quantified the extent to which adaptation decayed over time. Subjects reached to a peripheral target, and a rotation was applied to the visual feedback of the unseen motion. The retention of this adaptation over different delays (0-120 s) 1) decreased by 29.0 ± 6.8% at the longest delay and 2) was represented by a simple exponential, with a time constant of 22.5 ± 5.6 s. On the basis of this relationship we simulated how the spatial generalization of adaptation would change with delay. To test this directly, we trained additional subjects with the same perturbation and assessed transfer to 19 different locations (spaced 15° apart, symmetric around the trained location) and examined three delays (~4, 12, and 25 s). Consistent with the simulation, we found that generalization around the trained direction (±15°) significantly decreased with delay and distance, while locations >60° displayed near-constant spatiotemporal transfer. Intermediate distances (30° and 45°) showed a difference in transfer across space, but this amount was approximately constant across time. Interestingly, the decay at the trained direction was faster than that based purely on time, suggesting that the spatial transfer of adaptation is modified by concurrent passive (time dependent) and active (movement dependent) processes.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Short-term motor adaptation exhibits distinct spatial and temporal characteristics. Here we investigated the interaction of these features, utilizing a simple motor adaptation paradigm (recalibration of reaching arm movements in response to rotated visual feedback). We examined the changes in the spatial generalization of motor adaptation for different temporal manipulations and report that the spatiotemporal generalization of motor adaptation is generally local and is influenced by both passive (time dependent) and active (movement dependent) learning processes.
Copyright © 2017 the American Physiological Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  decay; generalization; motor adaptation; spatiotemporal generalization; stability

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28768744      PMCID: PMC5646197          DOI: 10.1152/jn.00822.2016

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


  57 in total

1.  Independent learning of internal models for kinematic and dynamic control of reaching.

Authors:  J W Krakauer; M F Ghilardi; C Ghez
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 24.884

2.  Is interlimb transfer of force-field adaptation a cognitive response to the sudden introduction of load?

Authors:  Nicole Malfait; David J Ostry
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Generalization of dynamics learning across changes in movement amplitude.

Authors:  Andrew A G Mattar; David J Ostry
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2010-05-12       Impact factor: 2.714

4.  The generalization of visuomotor learning to untrained movements and movement sequences based on movement vector and goal location remapping.

Authors:  Howard G Wu; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 6.167

5.  Long-term retention explained by a model of short-term learning in the adaptive control of reaching.

Authors:  Wilsaan M Joiner; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 2.714

6.  Adaptation and generalization in acceleration-dependent force fields.

Authors:  Eun Jung Hwang; Maurice A Smith; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2005-11-16       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Trial-by-trial analysis of intermanual transfer during visuomotor adaptation.

Authors:  Jordan A Taylor; Greg J Wojaczynski; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2011-09-14       Impact factor: 2.714

8.  Three timescales in prism adaptation.

Authors:  Masato Inoue; Motoaki Uchimura; Ayaka Karibe; Jacinta O'Shea; Yves Rossetti; Shigeru Kitazawa
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 2.714

9.  Motor memory is encoded as a gain-field combination of intrinsic and extrinsic action representations.

Authors:  Jordan B Brayanov; Daniel Z Press; Maurice A Smith
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-10-24       Impact factor: 6.167

10.  Visuomotor Learning Generalizes Around the Intended Movement.

Authors:  Kevin A Day; Ryan T Roemmich; Jordan A Taylor; Amy J Bastian
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2016-04-29
View more
  9 in total

1.  Reduced transfer of visuomotor adaptation is associated with aberrant sense of agency in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Sonia Bansal; Karthik G Murthy; Justin Fitzgerald; Barbara L Schwartz; Wilsaan M Joiner
Journal:  Neuroscience       Date:  2019-06-20       Impact factor: 3.590

2.  Assessing explicit strategies in force field adaptation.

Authors:  Raphael Schween; Samuel D McDougle; Mathias Hegele; Jordan A Taylor
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 2.714

3.  Did We Get Sensorimotor Adaptation Wrong? Implicit Adaptation as Direct Policy Updating Rather than Forward-Model-Based Learning.

Authors:  Alkis M Hadjiosif; John W Krakauer; Adrian M Haith
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2021-02-08       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Implicit adaptation to mirror reversal is in the correct coordinate system but the wrong direction.

Authors:  Tianhe Wang; Jordan A Taylor
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2021-10-06       Impact factor: 2.714

5.  Competition between parallel sensorimotor learning systems.

Authors:  Scott T Albert; Jihoon Jang; Shanaathanan Modchalingam; Bernard Marius 't Hart; Denise Henriques; Gonzalo Lerner; Valeria Della-Maggiore; Adrian M Haith; John W Krakauer; Reza Shadmehr
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-02-28       Impact factor: 8.713

6.  Slowing the body slows down time perception.

Authors:  Rose De Kock; Weiwei Zhou; Wilsaan M Joiner; Martin Wiener
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2021-04-08       Impact factor: 8.140

7.  Reexposure to a sensorimotor perturbation produces opposite effects on explicit and implicit learning processes.

Authors:  Guy Avraham; J Ryan Morehead; Hyosub E Kim; Richard B Ivry
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2021-03-05       Impact factor: 8.029

8.  The decay and consolidation of effector-independent motor memories.

Authors:  Shancheng Bao; Jinsung Wang; David L Wright; John J Buchanan; Yuming Lei
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 4.996

9.  Motion state-dependent motor learning based on explicit visual feedback is quickly recalled, but is less stable than adaptation to physical perturbations.

Authors:  Weiwei Zhou; Elizabeth A Kruse; Rylee Brower; Ryan North; Wilsaan M Joiner
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2022-08-31       Impact factor: 2.974

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.