Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 209, Issue 3, pp 319–332 | Cite as

Motor equivalence and self-motion induced by different movement speeds

  • J. P. Scholz
  • T. Dwight-Higgin
  • J. E. Lynch
  • Y. W. Tseng
  • V. Martin
  • G. Schöner
Research Article

Abstract

This study investigated pointing movements in 3D asking two questions: (1) Is goal-directed reaching accompanied by self-motion, a component of the joint velocity vector that leaves the hand’s movement unaffected? (2) Are differences in the terminal joint configurations among different speeds of reaching motor equivalent (i.e., terminal joint configurations differ more in directions of joint space that do not produce different pointer-tip positions than in directions that do) or non-motor equivalent (i.e., terminal joint configurations differ equally or more in directions of joint space that lead to different pointer-tip positions than in directions that do not affect the pointer-tip position). Subjects reached from an identical starting joint configuration and pointer-tip location to targets at slow, moderate, and fast speeds. Ten degrees of freedom of joint motion of the arm were recorded. The relationship between changes in the joint configuration and the three-dimensional pointer-tip position was expressed by a standard kinematic model, and the range- and null subspaces were computed from the associated Jacobian matrix. (1) The joint velocity vector and (2) the difference vector between terminal joint configurations from pairs of speed conditions were projected into the two subspaces. The relative length of the two components was used to quantify the amount of self-motion and the presence of motor equivalence, respectively. Results revealed that reaches were accompanied by a significant amount of self-motion at all reaching speeds. Self-motion scaled with movement speed. In addition, the difference in the terminal joint configuration between pairs of different reaching speeds revealed motor equivalence. The results are consistent with a control system that takes advantage of motor redundancy, allowing for flexibility in the face of perturbations, here induced by different movement speeds.

Keywords

Reaching Motor Control Motor equivalence Movement velocity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by NINDS Grant R01-NS050880, awarded to John Scholz.

References

  1. Atkeson CG, Hollerbach JM (1985) Kinematic features of unrestrained vertical arm movements. J Neurosci 5:2318–2330PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Belongie S (1999) Rodrigues’ rotation formula. In: Weisstein EW (ed). MathWorld–A Wolfram Web ResourceGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernstein N (1967) The co-ordination and regulation of movements. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Cole KJ, Abbs JH (1986) Coordination of three-joint digit movements for rapid finger-thumb grasp. J Neurophysiol 55:1407–1423PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cole KJ, Abbs JH (1987) Kinematic and electromyographic responses to perturbation of a rapid grasp. J Neurophysiol 57:1498–1510PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Cruse H, Bruwer M, Dean J (1993) Control of three- and four-joint arm movement: strategies for a manipulator with redundant degrees of freedom. J Mot Behav 25:131–139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Desmurget M, Prablanc C (1997) Postural control of three-dimensional prehension movements. J Neurophysiol 77:452–464PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Desmurget M, Prablanc C, Rossetti Y, Arzi M, Paulignan Y, Urquizar C, Mignot JC (1995) Postural and synergic control for three-dimensional movements of reaching and grasping. J Neurophysiol 74:905–910PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Desmurget M, Gréa H, Prablanc C (1998) Final posture of the upper limb depends on the initial position of the hand during prehension movements. Exp Brain Res 119:511–516PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gelfand IM, Latash ML (1998) On the problem of adequate language in motor control. Mot Control 2:306–313Google Scholar
  11. Gréa H, Desmurget M, Prablanc C (2000) Postural invariance in three-dimensional reaching and grasping movements. Exp Brain Res 134:155–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hollerbach JM, Flash T (1982) Dynamic interactions between limb segments during planar arm movement. Biol Cybern 44:67–77PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kelso JA, Tuller B, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, Fowler CA (1984) Functionally specific articulatory cooperation following jaw perturbations during speech: evidence for coordinative structures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 10:812–832PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Klein CA, Huang C (1983) Review of pseudoinverse control for use with kinematically redundant manipulators. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 13:245–250Google Scholar
  15. Latash ML, Scholz JP, Schoner G (2007) Toward a new theory of motor synergies. Mot Control 11:276–308Google Scholar
  16. Martin V, Scholz JP, Schöner G (2009) Redundancy, self-motion, and motor control. Neural Comput 21:1371–1414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Murray R, Li Z, Sastry SS (1994) A mathematical introduction to robotic manipulation. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  18. Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Hogan N (1991) Integrable solutions of kinematic redundancy via impedance control. Int J Robot Res 10:481–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Nishikawa KC, Murray ST, Flanders M (1999) Do arm postures vary with the speed of reaching? J Neurophysiol 81:2582–2586PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Reisman DS, Scholz JP (2003) Aspects of joint coordination are preserved during pointing in persons with post-stroke hemiparesis. Brain 126:2510–2527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rosenbaum DA, Meulenbroek RGJ, Vaughan J (1999) Remembered positions: stored locations or stored postures? Exp Brain Res 124:503–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rosenbaum DA, Meulenbroek RG, Vaughan J (2001a) Planning reaching and grasping movements: theoretical premises and practical implications. Mot Control 5:99–115Google Scholar
  23. Rosenbaum DA, Meulenbroek RJ, Vaughan J, Jansen C (2001b) Posture-based motion planning: applications to grasping. Psychol Rev 108:709–734PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rosenbaum DA, Cohen RG, Dawson AM, Jax SA, Meulenbroek RG, van der Wel R, Vaughan J (2009) The posture-based motion planning framework: new findings related to object manipulation, moving around obstacles, moving in three spatial dimensions, and haptic tracking. Adv Exp Med Biol 629:485–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sainburg RL, Kalakanis D (2000) Differences in control of limb dynamics during dominant and nondominant arm reaching. J Neurophysiol 83:2661–2675PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Scholz JP, Schoner G (1999) The uncontrolled manifold concept: identifying control variables for a functional task. Exp Brain Res 126:289–306PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Scholz JP, Schoner G, Latash ML (2000) Identifying the control structure of multijoint coordination during pistol shooting. Exp Brain Res 135:382–404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Scholz JP, Schöner G, Hsu WL, Jeka JJ, Horak FB, Martin V (2007) Motor equivalent control of the center of mass in response to support surface perturbations. Exp Brain Res 180:163–179PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schöner G (1995) Recent developments and problems in human movement science and their conceptual implications. Ecol Psychol 7:291–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Soderkvist I, Wedin PA (1993) Determining the movements of the skeleton using well-configured markers. J Biomech 26:1473–1477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Soechting JF, Lacquaniti F (1981) Invariant characteristics of a pointing movement in man. J Neurosci 1:710–720PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Soechting JF, Buneo CA, Herrmann U, Flanders M (1995) Moving effortlessly in three dimensions: does Donder’s law apply to arm movement? J Neurosci 15:6271–6280PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Thomas JS, Corcos DM, Hasan Z (2003) Effect of movement speed on limb segment motions for reaching from a standing position. Exp Brain Res 148:377–387PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Tillery SI, Ebner TJ, Soechting JF (1995) Task dependence of primate arm postures. Exp Brain Res 104:1–11PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Todorov E (2004) Optimality principles in sensorimotor control. Nat Neurosci 7:907–915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Torres EB, Andersen R (2006) Space-time separation during obstacle-avoidance learning in monkeys. J Neurophysiol 96:2613–2632PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Torres EB, Zipser D (2002) Reaching to grasp with a multi-jointed arm. I. A computational model. J Neurophysiol 88:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Torres EB, Zipser D (2004) Simultaneous control of hand displacements and rotations in orientation-matching experiments. J Appl Physiol 96:1978–1987PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tseng Y, Scholz JP (2005) The effect of workspace on the use of motor abundance. Motor Control 9Google Scholar
  40. Tseng Y, Scholz JP, Schöner G (2002) Goal-equivalent joint coordination in pointing: effect of vision and arm dominance. Mot Control 6:183–207Google Scholar
  41. Tseng Y, Scholz JP, Schöner G, Hotchkiss L (2003) Effect of accuracy constraint on joint coordination during pointing movements. Exp Brain Res 149:276–288PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Uno Y, Kawato M, Suzuki R (1989) Formation and control of optimal trajectory in human multijoint arm movement. Minimum torque-change model. Biol Cybern 61:89–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yang JF, Scholz JP (2005) Learning a throwing task is associated with differential changes in the use of motor abundance. Exp Brain Res 163:137–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. P. Scholz
    • 1
    • 2
  • T. Dwight-Higgin
    • 1
  • J. E. Lynch
    • 3
  • Y. W. Tseng
    • 1
    • 2
  • V. Martin
    • 4
  • G. Schöner
    • 4
  1. 1.Physical Therapy DepartmentUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA
  2. 2.Biomechanics and Movement Science Program, 307 McKinly LaboratoryUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiologyUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA
  4. 4.Institut für Neuroinformatik NB 3/31Ruhr-Universität BochumBochumGermany

Personalised recommendations