Cluff Tyler, Scott Stephen H
Centre for Neuroscience Studies and.
Centre for Neuroscience Studies and Departments of Biomedical and Molecular Sciences and Medicine, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
J Neurosci. 2015 Sep 9;35(36):12465-76. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0902-15.2015.
A central problem in motor neuroscience is to understand how we select, plan, and control motor actions. An influential idea is that the motor system computes and implements a desired limb trajectory, an intermediary control process between the behavioral goal (reach a spatial goal) and motor commands to move the limb. The most compelling evidence for trajectory control is that corrective responses are directed back toward the unperturbed trajectory when the limb is disturbed during movement. However, the idea of trajectory control conflicts with optimal control theories that emphasize goal-directed motor corrections. Here we show that corrective responses in human subjects can deviate back toward the unperturbed trajectory, but these reversals were only present when there were explicit limits on movement time. Our second experiment asked whether trajectory control could be generated if the trajectory was made an explicit goal of the task. Participants countered unexpected loads while reaching to a static goal, tracking a moving target, or maintaining their hand within a visually constrained path to a static goal. Corrective responses were directed back toward the constrained path or to intercept the moving target. However, corrections back to the unperturbed path disappeared when reaching to the static target. Long-latency muscle responses paralleled changes in the behavioral goal in both sets of experiments, but goal-directed responses were delayed by 15-25 ms when tracking the moving goal. Our results show the motor system can behave like a trajectory controller but only if a "desired trajectory" is the goal of the task. Significance statement: One of the most influential ideas in motor control is that the motor system computes a "desired trajectory" when reaching to a spatial goal. Here we revisit the experimental paradigm from seminal papers supporting trajectory control to illustrate that corrective responses appear to return to the original trajectory of the limb, but only if there is an imposed timing constraint. We then provide direct evidence that the human motor system can behave like a trajectory controller, and return the limb to its original trajectory when a specified trajectory is the goal of the task. Our results show that the motor system is capable of a spectrum of corrective responses that depend on the behavioral goal of the motor task.
运动神经科学的一个核心问题是理解我们如何选择、计划和控制运动动作。一个有影响力的观点是,运动系统计算并执行期望的肢体轨迹,这是行为目标(到达空间目标)与移动肢体的运动指令之间的一个中间控制过程。轨迹控制最有说服力的证据是,当肢体在运动过程中受到干扰时,纠正反应会指向未受干扰的轨迹。然而,轨迹控制的观点与强调目标导向运动校正的最优控制理论相冲突。在这里,我们表明人类受试者的纠正反应可以偏离回未受干扰的轨迹,但这些反转仅在运动时间有明确限制时出现。我们的第二个实验询问,如果将轨迹设定为任务的明确目标,是否能产生轨迹控制。参与者在伸手够到静态目标、跟踪移动目标或在视觉约束路径内将手保持在静态目标的过程中应对意外负载。纠正反应指向受约束路径或拦截移动目标。然而,在伸手够静态目标时,回到未受干扰路径的校正消失了。在两组实验中,长潜伏期肌肉反应与行为目标的变化平行,但在跟踪移动目标时,目标导向反应延迟了15 - 25毫秒。我们的结果表明,运动系统可以表现得像一个轨迹控制器,但前提是“期望轨迹”是任务的目标。
运动控制中最有影响力的观点之一是,运动系统在伸手够到空间目标时会计算“期望轨迹”。在这里,我们重新审视支持轨迹控制的开创性论文中的实验范式,以说明纠正反应似乎会回到肢体的原始轨迹,但前提是存在强加的时间限制。然后,我们提供直接证据表明,人类运动系统可以表现得像一个轨迹控制器,并在指定轨迹是任务目标时将肢体恢复到其原始轨迹。我们的结果表明,运动系统能够根据运动任务的行为目标做出一系列纠正反应。