Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 176, Issue 2, pp 237–247 | Cite as

Movement-dependent positioning errors in human elbow joint movements

  • Alexander P. Mel’nichouk
  • Natalia V. Bulgakova
  • Arkadij N. Tal’nov
  • Fredrik Hellström
  • Uwe Windhorst
  • Alexander I. Kostyukov
Research Article

Abstract

Healthy adult humans performed elbow movements in a horizontal plane under a small external extending torque (2.1–3.3 Nm). Test movements (TMs) consisted of slow ramp-and-hold flexions in the absence of visual feedback, with the target joint angle to be remembered from a preceding conditioning movement (CM). The CM was produced by matching two beams on the monitor screen: (1) command representing the target position (a straight line); and (2) a signal from the sensor of the elbow joint angle. Two kinds of CM were applied, which had the same target position (50° in most experiments) but differed in initial positions: (1) fully extended joint (0°, P1 CMs); (2) flexed joint (100°, P2 CMs). In a group of 25 subjects, the target in TMs was usually overshot, with the position errors depending on the CMs: 2.7 ± 0.6o (mean ± SEM) for P1 CMs, and 10.9 ± 0.7° (P < 0.001) for P2 CMs. Vibration of the elbow flexors substantially diminished the difference between the position errors, amounting to − 0.31 ± 0.5° and 2.33 ± 0.6°, respectively. It is suggested that the observed position errors resulted from after-effects in the activity of muscle spindles in agonist and antagonist muscles, but influence of differences in dynamic components of the afferent signals during oppositely directed approaches to the target cannot be excluded.

Keywords

Position errors Muscle hysteresis Muscle afferents 

References

  1. Brockett C, Warren N, Gregory JE, Morgan DL, Proske U (1997) A comparison of the effects of concentric versus eccentric exercise on force and position sense at the human elbow joint. Brain Res 771:251–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burke D, Hagbarth KE, Lofstedt L, Wallin BG (1976) The responses of human muscle spindle endings to vibration of non-contracting muscles. J Physiol 261:673–693PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Capaday C, Cooke JD (1981) The effects of muscle vibration on the attainment of intended final position during voluntary human arm movements. Exp Brain Res 42:228–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carson RG, Riek S, Shahbazpour N (2002) Central and peripheral mediation of human force sensation following eccentric or concentric contractions. J Physiol 539:913–925PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cherkassky VL (1997) After-effects of preceding movement on dynamic responses of spindle primary afferents during passive muscle lengthening in the cat. Neuroscience 76:611–617PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Edin BB, Vallbo ÅB (1990a) Dynamic response of human muscle spindle afferents to stretch. J Neurophysiol 63:1297–1306PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Edin BB, Vallbo ÅB (1990b) Muscle afferent responses to isometric contractions and relaxations in humans. J Neurophysiol 63:1307–1313PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gandevia SC (1996) Kinesthesia: roles for afferent signals and motor commands. In: Handbook of physiology. Exercise: regulation and integration of multiple systems. Bethesda. Am Physiol Soc, Sect. 12, pp 128–172Google Scholar
  9. Gilhodes JC, Roll JP, Tardy-Gervet MF (1986) Perceptual and motor effects of agonist-antagonist muscle vibration in man. Exp Brain Res 61:395–402PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodwin GM, McCloskey DI, Matthews PBC (1972) The contribution of muscle afferents to kinaesthesia shown by vibration-induced illusions of movement and by the effects of paralysing joint afferents. Brain 95:705–748PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gregory JE, Morgan DL, Proske U (1988a) Responses of muscle spindles depend on their history of activation and movement. Prog Brain Res 74:85–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gregory JE, Morgan DL, Proske U (1988b) After-effects in the responses of cat muscle spindles and errors of limb position sense in man. J Neurophysiol 59:1220–1230PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Gregory JE, Morgan DL, Proske U (2004) Responses of muscle spindles following a series of eccentric contractions. Exp Brain Res 157:234–240PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gregory JE, Wise AK, Wood SA, Prochazka A, Proske U (1998) Muscle history, fusimotor activity and the human stretch reflex. J Physiol 513:927–934PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Houk JC, Rymer WZ, Crago PE (1981) Nature of the dynamic response and its relation to the high sensitivity of muscle spindles to small changes in length. In: Taylor A, Prochazka A (eds) Muscle receptors and movement. Macmillan, London, pp 33–49Google Scholar
  16. Kostyukov AI (1998) Muscle hysteresis and movement control: a theoretical study. Neuroscience 83:303–320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kostyukov AI, Cherkassky VL (1992) Movement-dependent aftereffects in the firing of the spindle endings from the de-efferented muscles of the cat hindlimb. Neuroscience 46:989–999PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kostyukov AI, Cherkassky VL (1997) Interaction of the movement-dependent, extrafusal and fusimotor after-effects in the firing of the primary spindle endings. Neuroscience 76:1257–1266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lakie M, Walsh EG, Wright GW (1984) Resonance at the wrist demonstrated by the use of a torque motor: an instrumental analysis of muscle tone in man. J Physiol 353:265–285PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lennerstrand G, Thoden U (1968) Muscle spindle responses to concomitant variations in length and in fusimotor activation. Acta Physiol Scand 74:153–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Matthews PBC (1959) The dependence of tension upon extension in the stretch reflex of the soleus muscle of the decerebrate cat. J Physiol 147:521–546PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. McCloskey DI (1973) Differences between the senses of movement and position shown by effects of loading and vibration of muscles in man. Brain Res 61:119–131PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McCloskey DI (1978) Kinesthetic sensibility. Physiol Rev 58:763–820PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. McCloskey DI (1981) Corollary discharges: motor commands and perception. In: Brooks VB (ed) Handbook of physiology. The nervous system, motor control. American Physiological Society, Bethesda, pp 1415–1447Google Scholar
  25. Mel’nichouk AP, Bulgakova NV, Vasilenko DA (2003) Positioning of the human forearm in tracking movements and their reproduction under conditions of limited visual control. Neirofiziologiya/Neurophysiology (Kiev) 35:134–146Google Scholar
  26. Morgan DL, Proske U, Gregory JE (1991) Responses of primary endings of cat muscle spindles to locally applied vibration. Exp Brain Res 87:530–536PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Politti JC, Felice CJ, Valentinuzzi ME (2003) Arm EMG during abduction and adduction: hysteresis cycle. Med Eng Phys 25:317–320PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Prochazka A (1986) Proprioception during voluntary movement. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 64:499–504PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Proske U, Morgan DL, Gregory JE (1992) Muscle history dependence of responses to stretch of primary and secondary endings of cat soleus muscle spindles. J Physiol 445:81–95PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Proske U, Morgan DL, Gregory JE (1993) Thixotropy in skeletal muscle and in muscle spindles: a review. Prog Neurobiol 41:705–721PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Proske U, Schaible HG, Schmidt RF (1988) Joint receptors and kinaesthesia. Exp Brain Res 72:219–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Saxton JM, Clarkson PM, James R, Miles M, Westerfer M, Clark S, Donnelly AE (1995) Neuromuscular dysfunction following eccentric exercise. Med Sci Sports Exerc 27:1185–1193PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Taylor JL, McCloskey DI (1992) Detection of slow movements imposed at the elbow during active flexion in man. J Physiol 457:503–513PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Weerakkody NS, Percival P, Canny BJ, Morgan DL, Proske U (2003) Force matching at the elbow joint is disturbed by muscle soreness. Somatosens Mot Res. 20:27–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Windhorst U (1994) Shaping static elbow torque-angle relationships by spinal cord circuits: a theoretical study. Neuroscience 59:713–727PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander P. Mel’nichouk
    • 1
  • Natalia V. Bulgakova
    • 1
  • Arkadij N. Tal’nov
    • 1
  • Fredrik Hellström
    • 2
  • Uwe Windhorst
    • 3
  • Alexander I. Kostyukov
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Movement Physiology, Bogomoletz Institute of Physiology National Academy of SciencesKievUkraine
  2. 2.Belastningsskadecentrum Högskolan i GävleUmeäSweden
  3. 3.Physiological InstituteUniversity of GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations