A central back-coupling hypothesis on the organization of motor synergies: a physical metaphor and a neural model.
We offer a hypothesis on the organization of multi-effector motor synergies and illustrate it with the task of force production with a set of fingers. A physical metaphor, a leaking bucket, is analyzed to demonstrate that an inanimate structure can show apparent error compensation among its elements. A neural model is developed using tunable back-coupling loops as means of assuring error compensation in a task-specific way. The model demonstrates non-trivial features of multi-finger interaction such as delayed emergence of force stabilizing synergies and simultaneous stabilization of the total force and total moment produced by the fingers. The hypothesis suggests that neurophysiological structures involving short-latency feedback may play a central role in the formation of motor synergies.
Latash
Mark L
ML
Department of Kinesiology, Rec.Hall-268N, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, 16802, USA. mll11@psu.edu
Shim
Jae Kun
JK
Smilga
Andrei V
AV
Zatsiorsky
Vladimir M
VM
D000344:Afferent Pathways / Q000502:physiology; D000465:Algorithms; D002490:Central Nervous System / Q000502:physiology; D004525:Efferent Pathways / Q000502:physiology; D005246:Feedback / Q000502:physiology; D005385:Fingers / Q000294:innervation* / Q000502:physiology*; D018737:Hand Strength / Q000502:physiology; D006801:Humans; D008959:Models, Neurological; D009068:Movement / Q000502:physiology*; D009119:Muscle Contraction / Q000502:physiology*; D018482:Muscle, Skeletal / Q000294:innervation* / Q000502:physiology*; D009415:Nerve Net / Q000502:physiology; D011434:Proprioception / Q000502:physiology
Trends Neurosci. 2003 Sep;26(9):501-6
12948662
Biol Cybern. 1998 Aug;79(2):139-50
9791934
Nat Neurosci. 2002 Nov;5(11):1226-35
12404008
J Neurosci. 2003 Oct 1;23(26):8931-40
14523095
Exp Brain Res. 1998 Sep;122(2):131-8
9776511
Prog Brain Res. 2004;143:77-95
14653153
Exp Brain Res. 2004 Nov;159(1):65-71
15480588
J Neurophysiol. 1984 Apr;51(4):705-23
6716120
Biol Cybern. 2003 Oct;89(4):264-73
14605891
J Physiol. 2003 Apr 15;548(Pt 2):615-29
12611926
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1984 Dec;10(6):812-32
6239907
Physiol Behav. 2002 Dec;77(4-5):607-12
12527007
Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2002 Jan;30(1):26-31
11800496
Neural Netw. 1999 Oct;12(7-8):975-987
12662640
Neurosci Behav Physiol. 2002 May-Jun;32(3):231-5
12135334
Biol Cybern. 2003 Feb;88(2):91-8
12567224
Neural Netw. 1996 Oct;9(7):1141-1154
12662589
J Neurophysiol. 2001 Feb;85(2):605-19
11160497
J Neurosci. 2004 Feb 11;24(6):1428-38
14960615
Nat Neurosci. 1999 Feb;2(2):162-7
10195201
Exp Brain Res. 2000 Mar;131(2):187-95
10766271
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2004 Jul;97(1):213-24
15003998
Exp Brain Res. 1998 Apr;119(3):276-86
9551828
Exp Brain Res. 2001 Nov;141(2):153-65
11713627
Exerc Sport Sci Rev. 2004 Apr;32(2):75-80
15064652
Neurosci Lett. 2003 Dec 15;353(1):72-4
14642441
Cereb Cortex. 2003 Jan;13(1):15-24
12466211
Exp Brain Res. 2003 Jan;148(1):77-87
12478398
Neural Netw. 1998 Oct;11(7-8):1305-1316
12662751
Exp Brain Res. 2002 Oct;146(4):419-32
12355270
Nature. 2003 Nov 27;426(6965):442-6
14647382
J Physiol. 2004 Apr 1;556(Pt 1):267-82
14724214
Exp Brain Res. 2005 Jul;164(2):260-70
15770477
Motor Control. 1998 Oct;2(4):306-13
9758883
Exp Brain Res. 2003 Nov;153(1):45-58
12928761
Acta Physiol Scand. 1993 Oct;149(2):183-98
8266808
J Appl Physiol (1985). 2003 Oct;95(4):1361-9
12626484