Experimental Brain Research

, 175:439 | Cite as

Influence of predominant patterns of coordination on the exploitation of interaction torques in a two-joint rhythmic arm movement

Research Article


In this study we investigate the coordination between rhythmic flexion–extension (FE) and supination–pronation (SP) movements at the elbow joint-complex, while manipulating the intersegmental dynamics by means of a 2-degrees of freedom (df) robot arm. We hypothesized that constraints imposed by the structure of the neuromuscular-skeletal system would (1) result in predominant pattern(s) of coordination in the absence of interaction torques and (2) influence the capabilities of participants to exploit artificially induced interaction torques. Two experiments were conducted in which different conditions of interaction torques were applied on the SP-axis as a function of FE movements. These conditions promoted different patterns of coordination between the 2-df. Control trials conducted in the absence of interaction torques revealed that both the in-phase (supination synchronized with flexion) and the anti-phase (pronation synchronized with flexion) patterns were spontaneously established by participants. The predominance of these patterns of coordination is explained in terms of the mechanical action of bi-articular muscles acting at the elbow joint-complex, and in terms of the reflexes that link the activity of the muscles involved. Results obtained in the different conditions of interaction torques revealed that those neuromuscular-skeletal constraints either impede or favor the exploitation of intersegmental dynamics depending on the context. Interaction torques were indeed found to be exploited to a greater extent in conditions in which the profiles of interaction torques favored one of the two predominant patterns of coordination (i.e., in-phase or anti-phase) as opposed to other patterns of coordination (e.g., 90° or 270°). Those results are discussed in relation to recent studies reporting exploitation of interaction torques in the context of rhythmic movements.


Rhythmic movement Neuromuscular-skeletal constraint Intersegmental dynamics Interaction torque Multijoint coordination Bi-articular muscle 



This work was supported by The Australian Research Council and The National Health and Medical Research Council. A. de Rugy is supported by a University of Queensland Postdoctoral Research Fellowship.


  1. Batschelet E (1981) Circular statistics in biology. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. Barry BK, Warman GE, Carson RG (2005) Age-related differences in rapid muscle activation after rate of force development training of the elbow flexors. Exp Brain Res 162:122–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Buchanan JJ (2004) Learning a single limb multijoint coordination pattern: the impact of a mechanical constraint on the coordination dynamics of learning and transfer. Exp Brain Res 156:39–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Challis JH (1999) A procedure for the automatic determination of filter cut-off frequency for the processing of biomechanical data. J Appl Biomech 15:303–317Google Scholar
  5. Cnockaert JC, Lensel G, Pertuzon E (1975) Relative contribution of individual muscles to the isometric contraction of a muscular group. J Biomech 8:191–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Rugy A, Riek S, Carson RG (2006) Neuromuscular-skeletal origins of predominant patterns of coordination in a rhythmic two-joint arm movement. J Mot Behav 38:7–14PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dounskaia NV, Swinnen SP, Walter CB, Spaepen AJ, Verschueren SM (1998) Hierarchical control of different elbow-wrist coordination patterns. Exp Brain Res 121(3):239–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dounskaia N, Ketcham CJ, Stelmach GE (2002a) Commonalities and differences in control of various drawing movements. Exp Brain Res 146:11–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dounskaia NV, Ketcham CJ, Stelmach GE (2002b) Influence of biomechanical constraints on horizontal arm movements. Motor Control 6:366–387Google Scholar
  10. Ettema GJ, Styles G, Kippers V (1998) The moment arms of 23 muscles segments of the upper limb with varying elbow and forearm positions: implications for motor control. Hum Mov Sci 17:201–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ettema GJ, Taylor E, North JD, Kippers V (2005) Muscle synergies at the elbow in static and oscillating isometric torque tasks with dual degrees of freedom. Motor Control 9:59–74PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Gandolfo F, Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Bizzi E (1996) Motor learning by field approximation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93:3843–3846PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goodbody SJ, Wolpert DM (1998) Temporal and amplitude generalization in motor learning. J Neurophysiol 79:1825–1838PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hoy MG, Zernicke RF, Smith JL (1985) Contrasting roles of inertial and muscle moments at knee and ankle during paw-shake response. J Neurophysiol 54:1282–1294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Jamison JC, Caldwell GE (1993) Muscle synergies and isometric torque production: influence of supination and pronation level on elbow flexion. J Neurophysiol 70:947–960PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Klaiman E, Karniel A (2006) Bimanual adaptation: internal representations of bimanual rhythmic movements. Exp Brain Res 171:204–214PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mechsner F, Kerzel D, Knoblich G, Prinz W (2001) Perceptual basis of bimanual coordination. Nature 414:69–73PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Naito A (2004) Electrophysiological studies of muscles in the human upper limb: the biceps brachii. Anat Sci Int 79:11–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Naito A, Shindo M, Miyasaka T, Sun YJ, Momoi H, Chishima M (1998) Inhibitory projections from pronator teres to biceps brachii motoneurones in human. Exp Brain Res 121:99–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Russell DM, Sternad D (2001) Sinusoidal visuomotor tracking: intermittent servo-control or coupled oscillations? J Mot Behav 33:329–349PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schneider K, Zernicke RF (1989) Jerk-cost modulations during the practice of rapid arm movements. Biol Cybern 60:221–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schneider K, Zernicke RF, Schmidt RA, Hart TJ (1989) Changes in limb dynamics during the practice of rapid arm movements. J Biomech 22:805–817PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sergio LE, Ostry DJ (1994) Coordination of mono- and bi-articular muscles in multi-degree of freedom elbow movements. Exp Brain Res 97:551–555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sergio LE, Ostry DJ (1995) Coordination of multiple muscles in two degree of freedom elbow movements. Exp Brain Res 105:123–137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shemmell J, Forner M, Tresilian JR, Riek S, Barry BK, Carson RG (2005) Neuromuscular adaptation during skill acquisition on a two degree-of-freedom target-acquisition task: Isometric torque production. J Neurophysiol 94:3046–3057PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith JL, Hoy MG, Koshland GF, Phillips DM, Zernicke RF (1985) Intralimb coordination of the paw-shake response: a novel mixed synergy. J Neurophysiol 54:1271–1281PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Sternad D, Turvey MT, Saltzman EL (1999) Dynamics of 1:2 coordination: Generalizing relative phase to n:m Rhythms. J Mot Behav 31:207–223PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Swinnen SP, Dounskaia N, Walter CB, Serrien DJ (1997) Preferred and induced coordination modes during the acquisition of bimanual movements with a 2:1 frequency ratio. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 23:1087–1110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zanone PG, Kelso JA (1992) Evolution of behavioral attractors with learning: nonequilibrium phase transitions. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 18:403–421PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. van Zuylen EJ, Gielen CC, Denier van der Gon JJ (1988) Coordination and inhomogeneous activation of human arm muscles during isometric torques. J Neurophysiol 60:1523–1548PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aymar de Rugy
    • 1
  • Stephan Riek
    • 1
  • Richard G. Carson
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Perception and Motor Systems Laboratory, School of Human Movement StudiesUniversity of QueenslandBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.School of PsychologyQueen’s UniversityBelfastNorthern Ireland

Personalised recommendations