Abstract
The simultaneous performance of movements involving different effectors gives rise to neural and biomechanical interactions between and within limbs. The present study addressed the role of interlimb and intralimb constraints during the control of bimanual multijoint movements. Thirteen participants performed eight tasks involving the bilateral elbows and wrists under different coordination conditions. With respect to interlimb coordination, coordination patterns referred to the in-phase and anti-phase coordination modes, involving the simultaneous timing of homologous versus non-homologous muscles, respectively. With respect to inter-segmental (intralimb) coordination, the isodirectional mode referred to simultaneous flexions and extensions in the ipsilateral wrist and elbow joints, whereas the non-isodirectional mode involved simultaneous flexion in one joint together with extension in the other joint, or vice versa. The analysis of the data focused upon measures of relative phasing between proximal and distal joints within a limb as well as between the homologous joints of both limbs. With respect to interlimb coordination, findings revealed that adoption of the in-phase mode resulted in a higher quality of interlimb coordination than the anti-phase mode. However, the mode adopted in the distal joints had a larger impact on the quality of interlimb coordination than the mode adopted in the proximal joints. More specifically, in-phase coordination of the distal joints had a positive, and anti-phase coordination a negative, influence on the global coordinative behavior of the system. Minor effects of intralimb coordination modes on interlimb coordination were observed. With respect to intralimb coordination between the ipsilateral elbow and wrist, the isodirectional mode was performed with higher stability than the non-isodirectional mode. The mode of interlimb coordination also affected the quality of intralimb coordination, such that generating anti-phase coordination patterns in the distal joints had a negative influence on the accuracy and stability of intralimb coordination. Taken together, the present findings suggest a hierarchical structure whereby interlimb coordination constraints have a stronger impact on the global coordinative behavior of the system than intralimb coordination constraints. Moreover, the global coordinative state of the system is more affected by the coordination between the distal than between the proximal joints. Overall, the findings suggest that the mirror-image symmetry constraint has a powerful influence on bimanual multijoint coordination.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Batschelet E (1965) Statistical methods for the analysis of problems in animal orientation and certain biological rhythms. American Institute of Biological Sciences, Washington DC
Bernstein N (1967) The co-ordination and regulation of movements. Pergamon, Oxford
Byblow WD, Carson RG, Goodman D (1994) Expressions of asymmetries and anchoring in bimanual coordination. Hum Movement Sci 13:3–28
Byblow WD, Summers JJ, Semjen A, Wuyts IJ, Carson RG (1999) Spontaneous and intentional pattern switching in a multisegmental bimanual coordination task. Motor Control 3(4):372–393
Cardoso de Oliveira S, Gribova A, Donchin O, Bergman H, Vaadia E (2001) Neural interactions between motor cortical hemispheres during bimanual and unimanual arm movements. Eur J Neurosci 14:1881–1896
Carson RG, Thomas J, Summers JJ, Walters MR, Semjen A (1997) The dynamics of bimanual circle drawing. Q J Exp Psychol A 50(3):664–683
Donchin O, Gribova A, Steinberg O, Bergman H, Cardoso de Oliveira S Vaadia E (2001) Local field potentials related to bimanual movements in the primary and supplementary motor cortices. Exp Brain Res 140:46–55
Dounskaia N, Stelmach GE (2001) Movement planning and movement execution: What is in between? Behav Brain Sci 24(1):41
Dounskaia NV, Swinnen SP, Walter CB, Spaepen AJ, Verschueren SM (1998) Hierarchical control of different elbow-wrist coordination patterns. Exp Brain Res 121(3):239–254
Dounskaia NV, Ketcham CJ, Stelmach GE (2002) Influence of biomechanical constraints on horizontal arm movements. Motor Control 6(4):366–387
Gerloff C, Andres FG (2002) Bimanual coordination and interhemispheric interaction. Acta Psychol 110:161–186
Gribble PL, Ostry DJ (1999) Compensation for interaction torques during single- and multijoint limb movement. J Neurophysiol 82(5):2310–2326
Hollerbach MJ, Flash T (1982) Dynamic interactions between limb segments during planar arm movement. Biol Cybern 44(1):67–77
Kelso JAS (1984) Phase transitions and critical behavior in human bimanual coordination. Am J Physiol 240:R1000-R1004
Kelso JA, Jeka JJ (1992) Symmetry breaking dynamics of human multilimb coordination. J Exp Psychol Human 18(3):645–668
Kelso JA, Buchanan JJ, Wallace SA (1991) Order parameters for the neural organization of single, multijoint limb movement patterns. Exp Brain Res 85(2):432–444
Lee TD, Swinnen SP, Verschueren S (1995) Relative phase alterations during bimanual skill acquisition. J Motor Behav 27:263–274
Lee TD, Almeida QJ, Chua R (2002) Spatial constraints in bimanual coordination: influences of effector orientation. Exp Brain Res 146:205–212
Levin O, Ouamer M, Steyvers M, Swinnen SP (2001) Directional tuning effects during cyclical two-joint arm movements in the horizontal plane. Exp Brain Res 141(4):471–484
Mardia KV (1972) Statistics of directional data. Academic, London
Mechsner F, Kerzel D, Knoblich G, Prinz W (2001) Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature 414:69–73
Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–113
Park H, Collins DR, Turvey MT (2001) Dissociation of muscular and spatial constraints on patterns of interlimb coordination. J Exp Psychol Human 27:32–47
Putnam CA (1991) A segment interaction analysis of proximal-to-distal sequential segment motion patterns. Med Sci Sport Exer 23(1):130–144
Sainburg RL (2002) Evidence for a dynamic-dominance hypothesis of handedness. Exp Brain Res 142:241–258
Sainburg RL, Kalakanis D (2000) Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching. J Neurophysiol 83(5):2661–75
Semjen A, Summers JJ, Cattaert D (1995) Hand coordination in bimanual circle drawing. J Exp Psychol Human 21:1139–1157
Stucchi N, Viviani P (1993) Cerebral dominance and asynchrony between bimanual two-dimensional movements. J Exp Psychol Human 19:1200–1220
Swinnen SP (2002) Intermanual coordination: from behavioural principles to neural-network interactions. Nat Rev Neurosci 3:350–361
Swinnen SP, Wenderoth N (2004) Two hands, one brain: cognitive neuroscience of bimanual skill. Trends Cogn Sci 8:18–25
Swinnen SP, Jardin K, Meulenbroek R, Dounskaia N, Hofkens-Van Den Brandt M (1997) Egocentric and directional constraints in the expression of patterns of interlimb coordination. J Cognitive Neurosci 9:348–377
Swinnen SP, Jardin K, Verschueren S, Meulenbroek R, Franz L, Dounskaia N, Walter CB (1998) Exploring interlimb constraints during bimanual graphic performance: effects of muscle grouping and direction. Behav Brain Res 90:79–87
Virji-Babul N, Cooke JD (1995) Influence of joint interactional effects on the coordination of planar two-joint arm movements. Exp Brain Res 103(3):451–459
Wagemans J (1997) Characteristics and models of human symmetry detection. Trends Cogn Sci 1:346–352
Zajac FE, Gordon ME (1989) Determining muscle’s force and action in multi-articular movement. Exercise Sport Sci R 17:187–230
Acknowledgements
Support for the present study was provided through a grant from the Research Council of K.U. Leuven, Belgium (Contract No. OT/03/61) and the Research Programme of the Fund for Scientific Research—Flanders (FWO-Vlaanderen #G.0460.04).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, Y., Levin, O., Forner-Cordero, A. et al. Interactions between interlimb and intralimb coordination during the performance of bimanual multijoint movements. Exp Brain Res 163, 515–526 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-2206-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-2206-5