Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 181, Issue 4, pp 627–637 | Cite as

Parallels in control of voluntary and perturbation-evoked reach-to-grasp movements: EMG and kinematics

  • William H. GageEmail author
  • Karl F. Zabjek
  • Stephen W. Hill
  • William E. McIlroy
Research Article

Abstract

To determine the potential differences in control underlying compensatory and voluntary reach-to-grasp movements the current study compared the kinematic and electromyographic profiles associated with upper limb movement. Postural perturbations were delivered to evoke compensatory reach-to-grasp in ten healthy young adult volunteers while seated on a chair that tilted as an inverted pendulum in the frontal plane. Participants reached to grasp a laterally positioned stable handhold and pulled (or pushed) to return the chair to vertical. The distinguishing characteristic between the two behaviors was the onset latency and speed of movement. Consistent with compensatory balance reactions, the perturbation-evoked reach response was initiated very rapidly (137 vs. 239 ms for voluntary). As well the movement time was shorter, and peak velocity was greater for PERT movements. In spite of the profound differences in timing, the sequence of muscle activity onsets and the order of specific kinematic events were not different between maximum velocity voluntary (VOL) and perturbation-evoked (PERT) reach-to-grasp movements. Peak velocity and grasp aperture occurred prior to hand contact with the target for PERT and VOL movements, and wrist trajectory was influenced by the direction of perturbation relative to the target. To achieve such target specific control for responses initiated within 100 ms of the perturbation, and when characteristics of body movement were unpredictable, the perturbation-evoked movements would need to incorporate sensory cues associated with body movement relative to the target into the earliest aspects of the movement. This suggests reliance on an internal spatial map constructed prior to the onset of perturbation. Parallels in electromyographic and kinematic profiles between compensatory and voluntary reach-to-grasp movements, in spite of temporal differences, lead to the view they are controlled by common neural mechanisms.

Keywords

Voluntary reaching Aperture control Compensatory balance control Postural perturbation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by funding from the following agencies: NSERC (WE McIlroy), Ontario Ministry of Health and Toronto Rehabilitation Institute (WH Gage, SW Hill), Heart and Stroke Foundation Centre for Stroke Recovery (WE McIlroy), and Fonds de la recherché en Santé Québec (Post-Doctoral Fellowship, FRSQ; KF Zabjek).

References

  1. Adkin AL, Quant S, Maki BE, McIlroy WE (2006) Cortical responses associated with predictable and unpredictable compensatory balance reactions. Exp Brain Res (Epub ahead of print)Google Scholar
  2. Allum JH, Carpenter MG, Honegger F, Adkin AL, Bloem BR (2002) Age-dependent variations in the directional sensitivity of balance corrections and compensatory arm movements in man. J Physiol 542:643–663PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bateni H, Zecevic A, McIlroy WE, Maki BE (2004) Resolving conflicts in task demands during balance recovery: does holding an object inhibit compensatory grasping? Exp Brain Res 157:49–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bothner KE, Jensen JL (2001) How do non-muscular torques contribute to the kinetics of postural recovery following a support surface translation? J Biomech 34:245–250PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brauer SG, Woollacott M, Shumway-Cook A (2002) The influence of a concurrent cognitive task on the compensatory stepping response to a perturbation in balance-impaired and healthy elders. Gait Posture 15:83–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Burnod Y, Baraduc P, Battaglia-Mayer A, Guigon E, Koechlin E, Ferraina S, Lacquaniti F, Caminiti R (1999) Parieto-frontal coding of reaching: an integrated framework. Exp Brain Res 129:325–346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carpenter MG, Allum JH, Honegger F (2001) Vestibular influences on human postural control in combinations of pitch and roll planes reveal differences in spatiotemporal processing. Exp Brain Res 140:95–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Castiello U (2005) The neuroscience of grasping. Nat Rev Neurosci 6:726–736PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Crawford JD, Medendorp WP, Marotta JJ (2004) Spatial transformations for eye-hand coordination. J Neurophysiol 92:10–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Day BL, Lyon IN (2000) Voluntary modification of automatic arm movements evoked by motion of a visual target. Exp Brain Res 130:159–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elger K, Wing A, Gilles M (1999) Integration of the hand in postural reactions to sustained sideways force at the pelvis. Exp Brain Res 128:52–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fan J, He J, Tillery SI (2005) Control of hand orientation and arm movement during reach and grasp. Exp Brain Res (in press):1–14Google Scholar
  13. Ghafouri M, McIlroy WE, Maki BE (2004) Initiation of rapid reach-and-grasp balance reactions: is a pre-formed visuospatial map used in controlling the initial arm trajectory? Exp Brain Res 155:532–536PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gruneberg C, Duysens J, Honegger F, Allum JH (2005) Spatio-temporal separation of roll and pitch balance-correcting commands in humans. J Neurophysiol 94:3143–3158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hu Y, Osu R, Okada M, Goodale MA, Kawato M (2005) A model of the coupling between grip aperture and hand transport during human prehension. Exp Brain Res 167:301–304PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Inglis JT, Horak FB, Shupert CL, Jones-Rycewicz C (1994) The importance of somatosensory information in triggering and scaling automatic postural responses in humans. Exp Brain Res 101:159–64PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jeannerod M (1984) The timing of natural prehension movements. J Mot Behav 16:235–254PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Maki BE, McIlroy WE (1997) The role of limb movements in maintaining upright stance: the “change-in-support” strategy. Phys Ther 77:488–507PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Maki BE, McIlroy WE, Perry SD (1996) Influence of lateral destabilization on compensatory stepping responses. J Biomech 29:343–353PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maki BE, Edmondstone MA, McIlroy WE (2000) Age-related differences in laterally directed compensatory stepping behavior. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 55:M270–277PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Maki BE, McIlroy WE, Fernie GR (2003) Change-in-support reactions for balance recovery. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 22:20–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McIlroy WE, Maki BE (1993) Do anticipatory postural adjustments precede compensatory stepping reactions evoked by perturbation? Neurosci Lett 164:199–202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McIlroy WE, Maki BE (1995) Early activation of arm muscles follows external perturbation of upright stance. Neurosci Lett 184:177–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mon-Williams M, Tresilian JR, Coppard VL, Carson RG (2001) The effect of obstacle position on reach-to-grasp movements. Exp Brain Res 137:497–501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quant S, Adkin AL, Staines WR, McIlroy WE (2004) Cortical activation following a balance disturbance. Exp Brain Res 155:393–400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sibley KM, Zabjek KF, Camilleri JM, McIlroy WE (2006) Effects of perturbation amplitude on cortical potentials evoked by whole-body perturbations. The international congress on gait and mental function: book of abstracts, Madrid, Spain, pp 50Google Scholar
  27. Szturm T, Fallang B (1998) Effects of varying acceleration of platform translation and toes-up rotations on the pattern and magnitude of balance reactions in humans. J Vestib Res 8:381–397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Timmann D, Stelmach GE, Bloedel JR (1996) Temporal control of the reach and grip components during a prehension task in humans. Neurosci Lett 207:133–136PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • William H. Gage
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
    Email author
  • Karl F. Zabjek
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Stephen W. Hill
    • 1
    • 3
  • William E. McIlroy
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 5
  1. 1.Toronto Rehabilitation InstituteTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Graduate Department of Rehabilitation Science and Department of Physical TherapyUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Heart and Stroke Centre for Stroke RecoverySunnybrook and Womens’ College Health Sciences CentreTorontoCanada
  4. 4.School of Kinesiology and Health ScienceYork UniversityTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Department of KinesiologyUniversity of WaterlooWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations