Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 215, Issue 3–4, pp 269–283

Two classes of movements in motor control

Research Article

Abstract

This work investigated whether fundamental differences emerged between segments of complex movement sequences performed at different instructed speeds. To this end, we tested 5 novices and 1 karate expert as they performed beginner’s martial arts routines. We found that if one blindly took these segments and separated them according to the variability of trajectory parameters, one could unambiguously group two classes of movements between the same two space regions: one type that remained quite conserved despite speed changes and another type that changed with speed level. These groups corresponded to functionally different movements (strike segments explicitly directed to a set of goals and spontaneously retracting segments supplementing the goals). The curvature of the goal-directed segments remained quite conserved despite speed changes, yet the supplemental movements spanned families of trajectories with different curvature according to the speed. Likewise, the values of the hand’s peak velocity across trials were more variable in supplemental segments, and for each participant, there were different statistical signatures of variability between the two movement classes. This dichotomy between coexisting movement classes of our natural actions calls for a theoretical characterization. The present experimental results strongly suggest that two separate sets of principles may govern these movement classes in complex natural behaviors, since under different dynamics the hand did not describe a unique family of trajectories between the same two points in the 3D space.

Keywords

Goal-directed movements Supplemental movements Speeds Blind classification Kinesthetic sense Martial arts Maximum velocity 

References

  1. Abend W, Bizzi E, Morasso P (1982) Human arm trajectory formation. Brain 105(Pt 2):331–348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atkeson CG, Hollerbach JM (1985) Kinematic features of unrestrained vertical arm movements. J Neurosci 5(9):2318–2330PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernstein NA (1967) The co-ordination and regulation of movements, 1st English edn. Pergamon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Berthier NE, Keen R (2006) Development of reaching in infancy. Exp Brain Res 169(4):507–518. doi:10.1007/s00221-005-0169-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butterworth S (1930) On the theory of filter amplifiers. Exp Wirel Wirel Eng 7:536–541Google Scholar
  6. Conditt MA, Mussa-Ivaldi FA (1999) Central representation of time during motor learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96(20):11625–11630PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Duda O, Hart P, Stork D (2001) Pattern classification, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Flanders M (2011) What is the biological basis of sensorimotor integration? Biol Cybern 104(1–2):1–8. doi:10.1007/s00422-011-0419-9 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gargner JM, Karmel BZ, Magnano CL, Norton KI, Brown EG (1990) Neurobehavioral indicators of early brain insult in high-risk neonates. Dev Psychol 26(4):563–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibson JJ (1966) The senses considered as perceptual systems. Houghton Mifflin, BostonGoogle Scholar
  11. Guigon E, Baraduc P, Desmurget M (2007) Computational motor control: redundancy and invariance. J Neurophysiol 97(1):331–347. doi:10.1152/jn.00290.2006 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Isenhower RW, Metaxas DN, Jose JV, Torres EB (2011a) Movement variability as an objective classification tool for autism spectrum disorders. J Neurosci (submitted)Google Scholar
  13. Isenhower RW, Metaxas DN, Torres EB (2011b) Physical metrics of fluency training and task complexity in the natural movements of children with ASD gauge learning in the classroom environment. Paper presented at the Society for Neuroscience (SFN), WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  14. Izenman AJ (1991) Recent developments in nonparametric density estimation. J Am Stat Assoc 86(413):205–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Jose JV, Isenhower RW, Torres EB (2011) Statistics of motor variability used as a classification tool for spectral disorders: application to Autism and Parkinson’s disease. Paper presented at the Society for Neuroscience (SFN), WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  16. Karmel BZ, Gardner JM (2005) Neurobehavioral assessment in the neonatal period—the impact of Ferenc Katona. Ideggyogy Sz 58(9–10):315–323PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Karmel BZ, Gardner JM, Meade LS, Cohen IL, London E, Flory MJ, Lennon EM, Miroshnichenko I, Rabinowitz S, Parab S, Barone A, Harin A (2010) Early medical and behavioral characteristics of NICU infants later classified with ASD. Pediatrics 126(3):457–467. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-2680 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelso JAS (1995) Dynamic patterns: the self-organization of brain and behavior. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Kelso JAS, Engstrøm DA (2006) The complementary nature. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Konczak J, Dichgans J (1997) The development toward stereotypic arm kinematics during reaching in the first 3 years of life. Exp Brain Res 117(2):346–354PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Konczak J, Thelen E (1994) The dynamics of goal-directed reaching: a comparison of adult and infant movement patterns. In: Van Rossum JH, Laszlo JL (eds) Motor development: aspects of normal and delayed development. VU University Press, Amsterdam, pp 25–40Google Scholar
  22. Kugler PN, Turvey MT (1987) Information, natural laws, and self-assembly of rhythmic movement. L. Erlbaum Associates, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  23. Lacquaniti F, Soechting JF, Terzuolo CA (1982) Some factors pertinent to the organization and control of arm movements. Brain Res 252(2):394–397PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Limpert E, Stahel WA, Abbt M (2001) Log-normal distributions across the sciences: keys and clues. Bioscience 51(5):341–352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mardia KV, Kent JT, Bibby JM (1979) Multivariate analysis. Probability and mathematical statistics. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Marey E-J (1874) Animal mechanism; a treatise on terrestrial and aerial locomotion. International scientific series (London, England), vol 11, 2nd edn. Henry S. King & Co., LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Marey ÉJ, Pritchard E (1895) Movement. D. Appleton and company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Morasso P (1983) Three dimensional arm trajectories. Biol Cybern 48(3):187–194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nishikawa KC, Murray ST, Flanders M (1999) Do arm postures vary with the speed of reaching? J Neurophysiol 81(5):2582–2586PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Quian Quiroga R, Snyder LH, Batista AP, Cui H, Andersen RA (2006) Movement intention is better predicted than attention in the posterior parietal cortex. J Neurosci 26(13):3615–3620. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3468-05.2006 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Redgrave P, Rodriguez M, Smith Y, Rodriguez-Oroz MC, Lehericy S, Bergman H, Agid Y, DeLong MR, Obeso JA (2010) Goal-directed and habitual control in the basal ganglia: implications for Parkinson’s disease. Nat Rev Neurosci 11(11):760–772. doi:10.1038/nrn2915 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rencher AC (1995) Methods of multivariate analysis. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Scott D (1979) On optimal and data-based histograms. Biometrika 66:605–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shadmehr R, Mussa-Ivaldi FA (1994) Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task. J Neurosci 14(5 Pt 2):3208–3224PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Shadmehr R, Wise SP (2005) The computational neurobiology of reaching and pointing: a foundation for motor learning. Computational neuroscience. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  36. Smith LB, Thelen E (1993) A dynamic systems approach to development: applications. MIT Press/Bradford Books series in cognitive psychology. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  37. Soechting JF, Terzuolo CA (1988) Sensorimotor transformations underlying the organization of arm movements in three-dimensional space. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 66(4):502–507PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Terzuolo C, Fohlmeister JF, Maffei L, Poppele RE, Soechting JF, Young L (1982) On the application of systems analysis to neurophysiological problems. Arch Ital Biol 120(1–3):18–71PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Torres EB (2010) New symmetry of intended curved reaches. Behav Brain Funct 6:21. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-6-21 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Torres EB, Zipser D (2002) Reaching to grasp with a multi-jointed arm. I. Computational model. J Neurophysiol 88(5):2355–2367. doi:10.1152/jn.00030.2002 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Torres EB, Zipser D (2004) Simultaneous control of hand displacements and rotations in orientation-matching experiments. J Appl Physiol 96(5):1978–1987. doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.00872.2003 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Torres EB, Raymer A, Gonzalez Rothi LJ, Heilman KM, Poizner H (2010) Sensory-spatial transformations in the left posterior parietal cortex may contribute to reach timing. J Neurophysiol 104(5):2375–2388. doi:10.1152/jn.00089.2010 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Torres EB, Heilman KM, Poizner H (2011) Impaired endogenously-evoked automated reaching in Parkinson’s disease. J Neurosci (in press)Google Scholar
  44. von Hofsten C (1991) Structuring of early reaching movements: a longitudinal study. J Mot Behav 23(4):280–292. doi:10.1080/00222895.1991.9942039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. von Hofsten C, Lindhagen K (1979) Observations on the development of reaching for moving objects. J Exp Child Psychol 28(1):158–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zar J (1996) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology Department (Busch Campus)Rutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA
  2. 2.Cognitive ScienceRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA
  3. 3.Computational Biomedicine Imaging and Modeling, Computer ScienceRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA
  4. 4.Medical School (Neurology)Indiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations