JN Fuel your research with LabChart
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol 51: 1137-1148, 1984;
0022-3077/84 $5.00
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hore, J.
Right arrow Articles by Vilis, T.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hore, J.
Right arrow Articles by Vilis, T.

Journal of Neurophysiology, Vol 51, Issue 6 1137-1148, Copyright © 1984 by APS


ARTICLES

Loss of set in muscle responses to limb perturbations during cerebellar dysfunction

J. Hore and T. Vilis

The properties of electromyograph (EMG) responses that enabled the arm to return accurately to target following limb perturbations were investigated in five Cebus monkeys. In particular, factors that affected the timing and magnitude of an early antagonist response that occurred prior to stretch of the antagonist muscle were examined. The early antagonist response was large and early (latency, 60 ms) when the perturbation was brief and a constant force assisted the return movement. In this situation, early contraction of the antagonist muscle was required to prevent the return movement from overshooting the target. To determine whether this early antagonist response was influenced by prior instruction (which in this case was the type of perturbation the monkey had previously received), two types of perturbations requiring different EMG responses were studied. When torque steps (duration, 2,000 ms) were expected and were applied, monkeys generated M1, M2, and M3 responses and later activity only in the agonist (the initially stretched) muscle. When torque pulses (duration, 40 ms) were expected and were applied, monkeys generated M1 and M2 responses in the agonist and an early antagonist response. EMG responses to torque pulses and steps were then compared when the type of perturbation was expected and when it was unexpected. These comparisons revealed that the early antagonist response only occurred when the monkey expected a torque pulse. Therefore, this response was dependent on set. Expectation of a torque step caused enhancement of the agonist M2 and M3 responses. These agonist and antagonist EMG responses that were dependent on set were also influenced by changes in afferent drive. Cerebellar nuclear cooling through probes implanted lateral and medial to the dentate abolished that component of EMG responses attributed to set. The residual EMG responses in agonists and antagonists appeared to be driven by stretch of their respective muscles. The results suggest that when the nature of an arm perturbation is correctly predicted, the cerebellum provides accuracy in repositioning the limb a) by adjusting the magnitude of the M2 agonist response and b) by enabling activity after a latency of 60 ms (e.g., the M3 and early antagonist response) to be switched to the agonist or antagonist as appropriate, irrespective of which muscle is being stretched. This latter mechanism provides the motor system with predictive ability.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
D. S. Soteropoulos and S. N. Baker
Different Contributions of the Corpus Callosum and Cerebellum to Motor Coordination in Monkey
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2007; 98(5): 2962 - 2973.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
M. H. van der Linden, D. S. Marigold, F. J.M. Gabreels, and J. Duysens
Muscle Reflexes and Synergies Triggered by an Unexpected Support Surface Height During Walking
J Neurophysiol, May 1, 2007; 97(5): 3639 - 3650.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
Y. Ohki and K. Watanabe
Dependence of Reactive Responses in Human Bimanual Finger Movements on Sensory Feedback and Auditory Cues
J Neurophysiol, March 1, 2004; 91(3): 1260 - 1270.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
J. Hore, S. Watts, M. Leschuk, and A. MacDougall
Control of Finger Grip Forces in Overarm Throws Made by Skilled Throwers
J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2001; 86(6): 2678 - 2689.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. PsychiatryHome page
D Timmann, S Richter, S Bestmann, K T Kalveram, and J Konczak
Predictive control of muscle responses to arm perturbations in cerebellar patients
J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiatry, September 1, 2000; 69(3): 345 - 352.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
J. Hore, S. Watts, and D. Tweed
Prediction and Compensation by an Internal Model for Back Forces During Finger Opening in an Overarm Throw
J Neurophysiol, September 1, 1999; 82(3): 1187 - 1197.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
M. S. Milak, Y. Shimansky, V. Bracha, and J. R. Bloedel
Effects of Inactivating Individual Cerebellar Nuclei on the Performance and Retention of an Operantly Conditioned Forelimb Movement
J Neurophysiol, August 1, 1997; 78(2): 939 - 959.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Visit Other APS Journals Online