Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Influence of Visual Feedback Removal on the Neural Control Strategies During Isometric Force Production

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
XXVII Brazilian Congress on Biomedical Engineering (CBEB 2020)

Part of the book series: IFMBE Proceedings ((IFMBE,volume 83))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 53 Accesses

Abstract

Variability in the force production is known to be influenced by intrinsic and extrinsic properties of the neuromuscular system. Here, we aim at investigating the role of visual feedback (presence or absence) on the neural control of muscle force during a broad range of isometric contractions of a hand’s muscle. Eight participants performed isometric abductions of the index finger in six submaximal contraction intensities (5–75% of the maximum voluntary contraction, MVC). In each trial, participants performed the task with and without visual feedback of the performed force. High-density surface electromyogram (EMG) was recorded from the first dorsal interosseous muscle. Spike trains of motor units were obtained after semi-automatic decomposition of surface EMG signals. The interspike intervals (ISI) of motor units and the effective neural drive to the muscle (smoothed cumulative spike train, sCST) were estimated. The mean value, standard deviation (SD) and coefficient of variation (CoV) were computed for the force, sCST, and ISI. No interaction between visual feedback and contraction conditions were found, neither an effect of visual feedback on the dependent variables. An increase in the contraction intensity was followed by an increase in the mean sCST and a decrease in the mean ISI. Contraction intensity increased the force SD and the sCST SD. CoV of force and sCST both only decreased from 5%MVC to 30%MVC. On the other hand, contraction intensity did not change ISI SD, but increased ISI CoV. These results revealed that visual feedback did not influence motor control strategies in a large range of force levels. Moreover, we provided evidence that force variability is mostly influenced by fluctuations in the activity of a population of motor units rather than the discharge properties of individual motor units.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 509.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Slifkin AB, Newell KM (1999) Noise, information transmission, and force variability. J Exp Psychol 25:837–851

    Google Scholar 

  2. Watanabe RN, Magalhães FH, Elias LA et al (2013) Influences of premotoneuronal command statistics on the scaling of motor output variability during isometric plantar flexion. J Neurophysiol 110:2592–2606. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00073.2013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Dideriksen JL, Negro F, Enoka RM, Farina D (2012) Motor unit recruitment strategies and muscle properties determine the influence of synaptic noise on force steadiness. J Neurophysiol 107:3357–3369. https://doi.org/jn.00938.2011[pii]\n10.1152/jn.00938.2011

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jones KE, Hamilton AF, Wolpert DM (2002) Sources of signal-dependent noise during isometric force production. J Neurophysiol 88:1533–1544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sosnoff JJ, Newell KM (2005) Intermittent visual information and the multiple time scales of visual motor control of continuous isometric force production. Percept Psychophys 67:335–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Vaillancourt DE, Russell DM (2002) Temporal capacity of short-term visuomotor memory in continuous force production. Exp Brain Res 145:275–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-002-1081-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Prodoehl J, Vaillancourt DE (2010) Effects of visual gain on force control at the elbow and ankle. Exp Brain Res 200:67–79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-009-1966-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Limonta E, Rampichini S, Cè E, Esposito F (2015) Effects of visual feedback absence on force control during isometric contraction. Eur J Appl Physiol 115:507–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00421-014-3036-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vaillancourt DE, Larsson L, Newell KM (2002) Time-dependent structure in the discharge rate of human motor units. Clin Neurophysiol 113:1325–1338. https://doi.org/S1388245702001670[pii]

    Google Scholar 

  10. Christou EA, Jakobi JM, Critchlow A et al (2004) The 1- to 2-Hz oscillations in muscle force are exacerbated by stress , especially in older adults. J Appl Physiol 97:225–235. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00066.2004

  11. Baweja HS, Patel BK, Martinkewiz JD et al (2009) Removal of visual feedback alters muscle activity and reduces force variability during constant isometric contractions. Exp Brain Res 197:35–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-009-1883-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Negro F, Muceli S, Castronovo AM et al (2016) Multi-channel intramuscular and surface EMG decomposition by convolutive blind source separation. J Neural Eng 13:026027. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2560/13/2/026027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Holobar A, Zazula D (2007) Multichannel blind source separation using convolution Kernel compensation. IEEE Trans Signal Process 55:4487–4496. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2007.896108

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Farina D, Negro F, Dideriksen JL (2014) The effective neural drive to muscles is the common synaptic input to motor neurons. J Physiol 592:3427–3441. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2014.273581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Huddleston W, Keenan K, Ernest B (2013) Relations among visual strategies, force fluctuations, and attention during a force-matching task. Percept Mot Skills 117:775–800. https://doi.org/10.2466/22.24.PMS.117x29z6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Fox EJ, Baweja HS, Kim C et al (2013) Modulation of force below 1 Hz: age-associated differences and the effect of magnified visual feedback. PLoS ONE 8:e55970. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055970PONE-D-12-21601[pii]

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Germer CM, Del Vecchio A, Negro F, et al (2020) Neurophysiological correlates of force control improvement induced by sinusoidal vibrotactile stimulation. J Neural Eng 17:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1088/1741-2552/ab5e08

  18. Calvin WH, Stevens CF (1968) Synaptic noise and other sources of randomness in motoneuron interspike intervals. J Neurophysiol 31:574–587. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1968.31.4.574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Enoka RM, Duchateau J (2017) Rate coding and the control of muscle force. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med a029702. https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a029702

  20. Moritz CT, Barry BK, Pascoe MA, Enoka RM (2005) Discharge rate variability influences the variation in force fluctuations across the working range of a hand muscle. J Neurophysiol 93:2449–2459. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01122.2004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Negro F, Yavuz UŞ, Farina D (2016) The human motor neuron pools receive a dominant slow-varying common synaptic input. J Physiol 594:5491–5505. https://doi.org/10.1113/JP271748

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Farina D, Negro F, Muceli S, Enoka RM (2016) Principles of motor unit physiology evolve with advances in technology. Physiology 31:83–94. https://doi.org/10.1152/physiol.00040.2015

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

CMG was the recipient of a Ph.D. scholarship from CAPES. She also received a Visiting Student Grant from PDSE/CAPES (proc. no. 88881.134842/2016-01). EPZ is the recipient of a PhD scholarship from FAPESP (proc. no. 2019/01508-4). LAE was funded by CNPq (proc. no. 312442/2017-3) and FAPESP (proc. no. 2017/22191-3).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Neural Engineering Research Laboratory, Department of Biomedical Engineering, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Campinas, Av. Albert Einstein 400, Campinas, SP, Brazil

    C. M. Germer, E. P. Zambalde & L. A. Elias

  2. Center for Biomedical Engineering, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil

    L. A. Elias

Authors
  1. C. M. Germer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. P. Zambalde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. L. A. Elias
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. A. Elias .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Electrical Engineering, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Brazil

    Teodiano Freire Bastos-Filho

  2. Department of Electrical Engineering, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Brazil

    Eliete Maria de Oliveira Caldeira

  3. Department of Electrical Engineering, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Vitória, Brazil

    Anselmo Frizera-Neto

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Germer, C.M., Zambalde, E.P., Elias, L.A. (2022). Influence of Visual Feedback Removal on the Neural Control Strategies During Isometric Force Production. In: Bastos-Filho, T.F., de Oliveira Caldeira, E.M., Frizera-Neto, A. (eds) XXVII Brazilian Congress on Biomedical Engineering. CBEB 2020. IFMBE Proceedings, vol 83. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70601-2_319

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70601-2_319

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-70600-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-70601-2

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation