JN AJP citation statistics
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Neurophysiol (May 7, 2003). doi:10.1152/jn.00189.2003
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
90/3/1503    most recent
00189.2003v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
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 Web of Science (53)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bagesteiro, L. B.
Right arrow Articles by Sainburg, R. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bagesteiro, L. B.
Right arrow Articles by Sainburg, R. L.
Submitted on February 27, 2003
Accepted on May 2, 2003

Nondominant arm advantages in load compensation during rapid elbow joint movements

Leia B. Bagesteiro1 and Robert L. Sainburg1*

1 Department of Kinesiology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: rls45{at}psu.edu.

The current study was designed to examine interlimb asymmetries in responding to unpredictable changes in inertial loads, which have implications for our understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying handedness. Subjects made repetitive single joint speed constrained 20° elbow flexion movements, while the arm was supported on a horizontal, frictionless, air-jet system. On random trials, a 2kg mass was attached to the arm splint prior to the 'go' signal. Subjects were not given explicit information about the mass prior to movement, nor were they able to view their limb or the mass. Accordingly, muscle activity recorded prior to peak tangential finger acceleration was the same for loaded and baseline trials. After this point, substantial changes in muscle activity occurred. In both limbs, the load compensation response was associated with a reduction in extensor muscle activity, resulting in a prolonged flexion phase of motion. For the nondominant arm, this resulted in effective load compensation, such that no differences in final position accuracy occurred between loaded and baseline trials. However, the dominant arm response also included a considerable increase in flexor muscle activity. This substantially prolonged the flexor acceleration phase of motion, relative to that of the nondominant arm. As a result, the dominant arm over-compensated the effects of the load, producing a large and systematic overshoot of final position. These results indicated more effective load compensation responses for the nondominant arm; supporting a specialized role of the nondominant arm/hemisphere system in sensory feedback mediated error correction mechanisms. The results also suggest that specialization of the dominant arm system for controlling limb and task dynamics is more dependent on feedforward mechanisms.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
J. Wang and R. L. Sainburg
Generalization of Visuomotor Learning Between Bilateral and Unilateral Conditions
J Neurophysiol, November 1, 2009; 102(5): 2790 - 2799.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
B. A. Shabbott and R. L. Sainburg
Differentiating Between Two Models of Motor Lateralization
J Neurophysiol, August 1, 2008; 100(2): 565 - 575.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
D. J. Goble and S. H. Brown
Upper Limb Asymmetries in the Matching of Proprioceptive Versus Visual Targets
J Neurophysiol, June 1, 2008; 99(6): 3063 - 3074.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
C. Ghez, R. Scheidt, and H. Heijink
Different Learned Coordinate Frames for Planning Trajectories and Final Positions in Reaching
J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2007; 98(6): 3614 - 3626.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
R. A. Scheidt and C. Ghez
Separate Adaptive Mechanisms for Controlling Trajectory and Final Position in Reaching
J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2007; 98(6): 3600 - 3613.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
BrainHome page
S. Y. Schaefer, K. Y. Haaland, and R. L. Sainburg
Ipsilesional motor deficits following stroke reflect hemispheric specializations for movement control
Brain, August 1, 2007; 130(8): 2146 - 2158.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
R. A. Scheidt and T. Stoeckmann
Reach Adaptation and Final Position Control Amid Environmental Uncertainty After Stroke
J Neurophysiol, April 1, 2007; 97(4): 2824 - 2836.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
P. M. Bays and D. M. Wolpert
Actions and consequences in bimanual interaction are represented in different coordinate systems.
J. Neurosci., June 28, 2006; 26(26): 7121 - 7126.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
J. Hore, M. O'Brien, and S. Watts
Control of Joint Rotations in Overarm Throws of Different Speeds Made by Dominant and Nondominant Arms
J Neurophysiol, December 1, 2005; 94(6): 3975 - 3986.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurosci.Home page
J. Wang and R. L. Sainburg
Adaptation to Visuomotor Rotations Remaps Movement Vectors, Not Final Positions
J. Neurosci., April 20, 2005; 25(16): 4024 - 4030.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Neurophysiol.Home page
R. L. Sainburg and S. Y. Schaefer
Interlimb Differences in Control of Movement Extent
J Neurophysiol, September 1, 2004; 92(3): 1374 - 1383.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Visit Other APS Journals Online
Copyright © 2003 by the The American Physiological Society.