Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 237, Issue 1, pp 257–271 | Cite as

Local dynamic stability in temporal pattern of intersegmental coordination during various stride time and stride length combinations

  • Benio Kibushi
  • Toshio Moritani
  • Motoki KouzakiEmail author
Research Article
  • 105 Downloads

Abstract

For the regulation of walking speed, the central nervous system must select appropriate combinations of stride time and stride length (stride time–length combinations) and coordinate many joints or segments in the whole body. However, humans achieve both appropriate selection of stride time–length combinations and effortless coordination of joints or segments. Although this selection of stride time–length combination has been explained by minimized energy cost, it may also be explained by the stability of kinematic coordination. Therefore, we investigated the stability of kinematic coordination during walking across various stride time–length combinations. Whole body kinematic coordination was quantified as the kinematic synergies that represents the groups of simultaneously move segments (intersegmental coordination) and their activation patterns (temporal coordination). In addition, the maximum Lyapunov exponents were utilized to evaluate local dynamic stability. We calculated the maximum Lyapunov exponents in temporal coordination of kinematic synergies across various stride time–length combinations. The results showed that the maximum Lyapunov exponents of temporal coordination depended on stride time–length combinations. Moreover, the maximum Lyapunov exponents were high at fast walking speeds and very short stride length conditions. This result implies that fast walking speeds and very short stride length were associated with lower local dynamic stability of temporal coordination. We concluded that fast walking is associated with lower local dynamic stability of temporal coordination of kinematic synergies.

Keywords

Maximum Lyapunov exponents Motor control Kinematic synergies Singular value decomposition Stride time Stride length 

Notes

Author contributions

Conception and design of the experiments: BK, TM, and MK. Collection, analysis and interpretation of the data: BK. Drafting of the article or critical revision for important intellectual content: BK and MK. Final approval of the version to be published: BK, TM, and MK.

Funding

This work was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Research Fellow (Grant Number 16J07348); the Japanese Council for Science, Technology and Innovation (CSTI); and the Cross-ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion Program (SIP Project ID 14533567 Funding agency: Bio-oriented Technology Research Advancement Institution, NARO).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Data availability

The datasets analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Allen JL, Neptune RR (2012) Three-dimensional modular control of human walking. J Biomech 45(12):2157–2163Google Scholar
  2. Balasubramanian CK, Bowden MG, Neptune RR, Kautz SA (2007) Relationship between step length asymmetry and walking performance in subjects with chronic hemiparesis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 88(1):43–49Google Scholar
  3. Bertram JE, Ruina A (2001) Multiple walking speed-frequency relations are predicted by constrained optimization. J Theor Biol 209(4):445–453Google Scholar
  4. Bianchi L, Angelini D, Orani GP, Lacquaniti F (1998) Kinematic coordination in human gait: relation to mechanical energy cost. J Neurophysiol 79(4):2155–2170Google Scholar
  5. Borghese NA, Bianchi L, Lacquaniti F (1996) Kinematic determinants of human locomotion. J Physiol 494(3):863–879Google Scholar
  6. Bruijn SM, van Dieën JH, Meijer OG, Beek PJ (2009) Statistical precision and sensitivity of measures of dynamic gait stability. J Neurosci Methods 178(2):327–333Google Scholar
  7. Bruijn SM, Bregman DJ, Meijer OG, Beek PJ, van Dieën JH (2011) The validity of stability measures: a modelling approach. J Biomech 44(13):2401–2408Google Scholar
  8. Bruijn SM, Bregman DJ, Meijer OG, Beek PJ, van Dieën JH (2012) Maximum Lyapunov exponents as predictors of global gait stability: a modelling approach. Med Eng Phys 34(4):428–436Google Scholar
  9. Clark DJ, Ting LH, Zajac FE, Neptune RR, Kautz SA (2010) Merging of healthy motor modules predicts reduced locomotor performance and muscle coordination complexity post-stroke. J Neurophysiol 103(2):844–857Google Scholar
  10. Courtine G, Schieppati M (2004) Tuning of a basic coordination pattern constructs straight-ahead and curved walking in humans. J Neurophysiol 91(4):1524–1535Google Scholar
  11. d’Avella A, Saltiel P, Bizzi E (2003) Combinations of muscle synergies in the construction of a natural motor behavior. Nat Neurosci 6(3):300–308Google Scholar
  12. Dingwell JB, Cusumano JP (2000) Nonlinear time series analysis of normal and pathological human walking. Chaos 10(4):848–863Google Scholar
  13. Dingwell JB, Kang HG (2007) Differences between local and orbital dynamic stability during human walking. J Biomech Eng 129(4):586–593Google Scholar
  14. Dingwell JB, Marin LC (2006) Kinematic variability and local dynamic stability of upper body motions when walking at different speeds. J Biomech 39(3):444–452Google Scholar
  15. Dingwell JB, Cusumano JP, Sternad D, Cavanagh PR (2000) Slower speeds in patients with diabetic neuropathy lead to improved local dynamic stability of continuous overground walking. J Biomech 33(10):1269–1277Google Scholar
  16. Doke J, Donelan JM, Kuo AD (2005) Mechanics and energetics of swinging the human leg. J Exp Biol 208(3):439–445Google Scholar
  17. Donelan JM, Kram R, Kuo AD (2001) Mechanical and metabolic determinants of the preferred step width in human walking. Proc Biol Sci 268(1480):1985–1992Google Scholar
  18. Elble RJ, Thomas SS, Higgins C, Colliver J (1991) Stride-dependent changes in gait of older people. J Neurol 238(1):1–5Google Scholar
  19. England SA, Granata KP (2007) The influence of gait speed on local dynamic stability of walking. Gait Posture 25(2):172–178Google Scholar
  20. Fraser AM, Swinney HL (1986) Independent coordinates for strange attractors from mutual information. Phys Rev A Gen Phys 33(2):1134–1140Google Scholar
  21. Funato T, Aoi S, Oshima H, Tsuchiya K (2010) Variant and invariant patterns embedded in human locomotion through whole body kinematic coordination. Exp Brain Res 205(4):497–511Google Scholar
  22. Funato T, Aoi S, Tomita N, Tsuchiya K (2015) Validating the feedback control of intersegmental coordination by fluctuation analysis of disturbed walking. Exp Brain Res 233(5):1421–1432Google Scholar
  23. Gottschall JS, Kram R (2005) Energy cost and muscular activity required for leg swing during walking. J Appl Physiol (1985) 99(1):23–30Google Scholar
  24. Grasso R, Bianchi L, Lacquaniti F (1998) Motor patterns for human gait: backward versus forward locomotion. J Neurophysiol 80(4):868–885Google Scholar
  25. Hagio S, Kouzaki M (2014) The flexible recruitment of muscle synergies depends on the required force-generating capability. J Neurophysiol 112(2):316–327Google Scholar
  26. Hagio S, Fukuda M, Kouzaki M (2015) Identification of muscle synergies associated with gait transition in humans. Front Hum Neurosci 9:48Google Scholar
  27. Hak L, Houdijk H, Beek PJ, van Dieën JH (2013) Steps to take to enhance gait stability: the effect of stride frequency, stride length, and walking speed on local dynamic stability and margins of stability. PLoS One 8:12Google Scholar
  28. Hoogkamer W, Bruijn SM, Sunaert S, Swinnen SP, Van Calenbergh F, Duysens J (2015) Toward new sensitive measures to evaluate gait stability in focal cerebellar lesion patients. Gait Posture 41(2):592–596Google Scholar
  29. Huang Y, Vanderborght B, Van Ham R, Wang Q (2014) Torque–stiffness-controlled dynamic walking with central pattern generators. Biol Cybern 108(6):803–823Google Scholar
  30. Huang Y, Huang Q, Wang Q (2017) Chaos and bifurcation control of torque- stiffness-controlled dynamic bipedal walking. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Syst 47(7):1229–1240Google Scholar
  31. Ivanenko YP, Grasso R, Macellari V, Lacquaniti F (2002) Control of foot trajectory in human locomotion: role of ground contact forces in simulated reduced gravity. J Neurophysiol 87(6):3070–3089Google Scholar
  32. Ivanenko YP, Cappellini G, Dominici N, Poppele RE, Lacquaniti F (2007) Modular control of limb movements during human locomotion. J Neurosci 27(41):11149–11161Google Scholar
  33. Judge JO, Davis RB, Ounpuu SJ (1996) Step length reductions in advanced age: the role of ankle and hip kinetics. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 51(6):303–312Google Scholar
  34. Kang HG, Dingwell JB (2008) Effects of walking speed, strength and range of motion on gait stability in healthy older adults. J Biomech 41(14):2899–2905Google Scholar
  35. Kennel MB, Brown R, Abarbanel HD (1992) Determining embedding dimension for phase-space reconstruction using a geometrical construction. Phys Rev A 45(6):3403–3411Google Scholar
  36. Kerrigan DC, Todd MK, Della Croce U, Lipsitz LA, Collins JJ (1998) Biomechanical gait alterations independent of speed in the healthy elderly: evidence for specific limiting impairments. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 79(3):317–322Google Scholar
  37. Kibushi B, Hagio S, Moritani T, Kouzaki M (2018) Speed-dependent modulation of muscle activity based on muscle synergies during treadmill walking. Front Hum Neurosci 12:4Google Scholar
  38. Kubo A, Hagio S, Kibushi B, Moritani T, Kouzaki M (2017) action direction of muscle synergies in voluntary multi-directional postural control. Front Hum Neurosci 11:434Google Scholar
  39. Kuo AD (2001) A simple model of bipedal walking predicts the preferred speed-step length relationship. J Biomech Eng 123(3):264–269Google Scholar
  40. Kurz MJ, Markopoulou K, Stergiou N (2010) Attractor divergence as a metric for assessing walking balance. Nonlinear Dyn Psychol Life Sci 14(2):151–164Google Scholar
  41. Labini FS, Meli A, Ivanenko YP, Tufarelli D (2012) Recurrence quantification analysis of gait in normal and hypovestibular subjects. Gait Posture 35(1):48–55Google Scholar
  42. Lacquaniti F, Grasso R, Zago M (1999) Motor Patterns in Walking. News Physiol Sci 14:168–174Google Scholar
  43. Lim Y, Lin YC, Pandy MG (2017) Effects of step length and step frequency on lower-limb muscle function in human gait. J Biomech 57:1–7Google Scholar
  44. Liu MQ, Anderson FC, Schwartz MH, Delp SL (2008) Muscle contributions to support and progression over a range of walking speeds. J Biomech 41(15):3243–3252Google Scholar
  45. Lockhart TE, Liu J (2008) Differentiating fall-prone and healthy adults using local dynamic stability. Ergonomics 51(12):1860–1872Google Scholar
  46. Martin PE, Marsh AP (1992) Step length and frequency effects on ground reaction forces during walking. J Biomech 25(10):1237–1239Google Scholar
  47. McAndrew Young PM, Dingwell JB (2012) Voluntary changes in step width and step length during human walking affect dynamic margins of stability. Gait Posture 36(2):219–224Google Scholar
  48. McGowan CP, Neptune RR, Clark DJ, Kautz SA (2010) Modular control of human walking: adaptations to altered mechanical demands. J Biomech 43(3):412–419Google Scholar
  49. Neptune RR, Clark DJ, Kautz SA (2009) Modular control of human walking: a simulation study. J Biomech 42(9):1282–1287Google Scholar
  50. Nishida K, Hagio S, Kibushi B, Moritani T, Kouzaki M (2017) Comparison of muscle synergies for running between different foot strike patterns. PLoS One 12:e0171535Google Scholar
  51. Pires NJ, Lay BS, Rubenson J (2014) Joint-level mechanics of the walk-to-run transition in humans. J Exp Biol 217(19):3519–3527Google Scholar
  52. Prilutsky BI, Gregor RJ (2001) Swing-and support-related muscle actions differentially trigger human walk–run and run–walk transitions. J Exp Biol 204(13):2277–2287Google Scholar
  53. Rosenstein MT, Collins JJ, De Luca CJ (1993) A practical method for calculating largest Lyapunov exponents from small data sets. Phys D 65:117–134Google Scholar
  54. Sano H, Wada T (2017) Knee motion generation method for transfemoral prosthesis based on kinematic synergy and inertial motion. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 25(12):2387–2397Google Scholar
  55. Santuz A, Ekizos A, Eckardt N, Kibele A, Arampatzis A (2018) Challenging human locomotion: stability and modular organisation in unsteady conditions. Sci Rep 8(1):2740Google Scholar
  56. Snaterse M, Ton R, Kuo AD, Donelan JM (2011) Distinct fast and slow processes contribute to the selection of preferred step frequency during human walking. J Appl Physiol 110(6):1682–1690Google Scholar
  57. Steele KM, Rozumalski A, Schwartz MH (2015) Muscle synergies and complexity of neuromuscular control during gait in cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 57(12):1176–1782Google Scholar
  58. Tresch MC, Saltiel P, Bizzi E (1999) The construction of movement by the spinal cord. Nat Neurosci 2(2):162–167Google Scholar
  59. van Schooten KS, Rispens SM, Pijnappels M, Daffertshofer A, van Dieen JH (2013) Assessing gait stability: the influence of state space reconstruction on inter-and intra-day reliability of local dynamic stability during over-ground walking. J Biomech 46(1):137–141Google Scholar
  60. Vaughan CL, Langerak NG, O’Malley MJ (2003) Neuromaturation of human locomotion revealed by non-dimensional scaling. Exp Brain Res 153(1):123–127Google Scholar
  61. Wu AR, Kuo AD (2016) Determinants of preferred ground clearance during swing phase of human walking. J Exp Biol 219(19):3106–3113Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Neurophysiology, Graduate School of Human and Environmental StudiesKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  2. 2.Research Fellow of the Japan Society for the Promotion of ScienceTokyoJapan
  3. 3.School of Health and Sport SciencesChukyo UniversityNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations