The primary afferent activity cannot capture the dynamical features of muscle activity during reaching movements.
Authors: Hardesty, R. L.; Boots, M. T.; Yakovenko, S.; Gritsenko, V.
Category: neuroscience
Date: 2019-01-22

The stabilizing role of sensory feedback in relation to realistic 3-dimensional movement dynamics remains poorly understood. The objective of this study was to quantify how primary afferent activity contributes to shaping muscle activity patterns during reaching movements. To achieve this objective, we designed a virtual reality task that guided healthy human subjects through a set of planar reaching movements with controlled kinematic and dynamic conditions that minimized inter-subject variability. Next, we integrated human upper-limb models of musculoskeletal dynamics and proprioception to analyze motion and major muscle activation patterns during these tasks. We recorded electromyographic and motion-capture data and used the integrated model to simulate joint kinematics, joint torques due to muscle contractions, muscle length changes, and simulated primary afferent feedback. The parameters of the primary afferent model were altered systematically to evaluate the effect of fusimotor drive. The experimental and simulated data were analyzed with hierarchical clustering. We found that the muscle activity patterns contained flexible task-dependent groups that consisted of co-activating agonistic and antagonistic muscles that changed with the dynamics of the task. The activity of muscles spanning only the shoulder generally grouped into a proximal cluster, while the muscles spanning the wrist grouped into a distal cluster. The bifunctional muscle spanning the shoulder and elbow were flexibly grouped with either proximal or distal cluster based on the dynamical requirements of the task. The composition and activation of these groups reflected the relative contribution of active and passive forces to each motion. In contrast, the simulated primary afferent feedback was most related to joint kinematics rather than dynamics, even though the primary afferent models had nonlinear dynamical components and variable fusimotor drive. Simulated physiological changes to the fusimotor drive were not sufficient to reproduce the dynamical features in muscle activity pattern. Altogether, these results suggest that sensory feedback signals are in a different domain from that of muscle activation signals. This indicates that to solve the neuromechanical problem, the central nervous system controls limb dynamics through task-dependent co-activation of muscles and non-linear modulation of monosynaptic primary afferent feedback.

New & NoteworthyHere we answered the fundamental question in sensorimotor transformation of how primary afferent signals can contribute to the compensation for limb dynamics evident in muscle activity. We combined computational and experimental approaches to create a new experimental paradigm that challenges the nervous system with passive limb dynamics that either assists or resists the desired movement. We found that the active dynamical features present in muscle activity are unlikely to arise from direct feedback from primary afferents.