Sophisticated spinal contributions to motor control

Trends in Neurosciences

Volumn 26, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 269-276

  Poppele, Richard ^a   Bosco, Gianfranco ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROME TOR VERGATA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIOR; DYNAMICS; LOCOMOTION; MOTOR CONTROL; MOTOR PERFORMANCE; MUSCLE CONTRACTION; NERVE FUNCTION; NERVE STIMULATION; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SENSORIMOTOR FUNCTION; SPINAL CORD;

EID: 0037722718     PISSN: 01662236     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0166-2236(03)00073-0     Document Type: Review

References (72)

1. Soechting J., Flanders M. Moving in three-dimensional space: frames of reference, vectors and coordinate systems. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 15:1992;167-191.
2. Levinsson A., et al. Spinal sensorimotor transformation: relation between cutaneous somatotopy and a reflex network. J. Neurosci. 22:2002;8170-8182.
3. Jeannerod M., et al. Grasping objects: the cortical mechanisms of visuomotor transformation. Trends Neurosci. 18:1995;314-320.
4. Atkeson C.G. Learning arm kinematics and dynamics. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 12:1989;157-183.
5. McIntyre J., Bizzi E. Servo hypothesis for the biological control of movement. J Motor Behav. 25:1993;193-202.
6. Schweighofer N., et al. Role of the cerebellum in reaching movements in humans I Distributed inverse dynamics control. Eur. J. Neurosci. 10:1998;86-94.
7. Kawato M. Internal models for motor control and trajectory planning. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 9:1999;718-727.
8. Darlot C., et al. Computation of inverse dynamics for the control of movements. Biol. Cybern. 75:1996;173-186.
9. Wada Y., et al. Quantitative examinations for multi joint arm trajectory planning-using a robust calculation algorithm of the minimum commanded torque change trajectory. Neural Netw. 14:2001;381-393.
10. Hogan N., et al. Controlling multijoint motor behavior. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 15:1987;153-190.
11. Todorov E., Jordan M.I. Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination. Nat. Neurosci. 5:2002;1226-1235.
12. Gielen C.C., et al. Principles for the control of kinematically redundant limbs. Fetter M., et al. Three-Dimensional Kinematic Principles of Eye-, Head- and Limb-Movements. 1997;285-297 Harwood.
13. Buchanan J.J., Horak F.B. Transitions in a postural task: do the recruitment and suppression of degrees of freedom stabilize posture? Exp. Brain Res. 139:2001;482-494.
14. Gielen C.C., van Bolhuis B.M. Task-dependent reduction of the number of degrees of freedom in sensorimotor systems. Brain Res. Brain Res. Rev. 28:1998;136-142.
15. Soechting J.F., et al. Moving effortlessly in three dimensions: does Donders' law apply to arm movement? J. Neurosci. 15:1995;6271-6280.
16. Gottlieb G.L., et al. Coordinating movement at two joints: a principle of linear covariance. J. Neurophysiol. 75:1996;1760-1764.
17. Bernstein N.A. The Co-ordination and Regulation of Movements. 1967;Oxford Press.
18. Giszter S.F., et al. Kinematic strategies and sensorimotor transformations in the wiping movements of frogs. J. Neurophysiol. 62:1989;750-767.
19. Fukson O.I., et al. The spinal frog takes into account the scheme of its body during the wiping reflex. Science. 209:1980;1261-1263.
20. Berkinblit M.B., et al. Adaptability of innate motor patterns and motor control mechanisms. Behav. Brain Sci. 9:1984;585-638.
21. Mortin L.I., Stein P.S. Spinal cord segments containing key elements of the central pattern generators for three forms of scratch reflex in the turtle. J. Neurosci. 9:1989;2285-2296.
22. Grillner S., Wallen P. Central pattern generators for locomotion, with special reference to vertebrates. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 8:1985;233-261.
23. Pearson K.G. Proprioceptive regulation of locomotion. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 5:1995;786-791.
24. Arshavsky Y.I., et al. Pattern generation. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 7:1997;781-789.
25. Hiebert G.W., Pearson K.G. Contribution of sensory feedback to the generation of extensor activity during walking in the decerebrate Cat. J. Neurophysiol. 81:1999;758-770.
26. Pearson K.G., et al. Enhancement and resetting of locomotor activity by muscle afferents. Ann. New York Acad. Sci. 860:1998;203-215.
27. Shik M.L., et al. Control of walking and running by means of electrical stimulation of the mesencephalon. Electromyogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 26:1969;549.
28. Mori S., et al. Stimulation of a restricted region in the midline cerebellar white matter evokes coordinated quadrupedal locomotion in the decerebrate cat. J. Neurophysiol. 82:1999;290-300.
29. Dietz V. Proprioception and locomotor disorders. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 3:2002;781-790.
30. Pearson K.G. Neural adaptation in the generation of rhythmic behavior. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 62:2000;723-753.
31. Rossignol S., et al. Locomotor performance and adaptation after partial or complete spinal cord lesions in the cat. Prog. Brain Res. 123:1999;349-365.
32. Mortin L.I., et al. Three forms of scratch reflex in the turtle: Movement analysis. J. Neurophysiol. 53:1985;1501-1516.
33. Stein P.S., Daniels-McQueen S. Modular organization of turtle spinal interneurons during normal and deletion fictive rostral scratching. J. Neurosci. 22:2002;6800-6809.
34. Berkowitz A., Stein P.S. Activity of descending propriospinal axons in the turtle hindlimb enlargement during two forms of fictive scratching: broad tuning to regions of the body surface. J. Neurosci. 14:1994;5089-5104.
35. Bizzi E., et al. Modular organization of motor behavior in the frog's spinal cord. Trends Neurosci. 18:1995;442-446.
36. Giszter S.F., et al. Convergent force fields organized in the frog's spinal cord. J. Neurosci. 13:1993;467-491.
37. Bizzi E., et al. A new perspectives on spinal motor systems. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 1:2000;101-108.
38. Tresch M.C., et al. The construction of movement by the spinal cord. Nat. Neurosci. 2:1999;162-167.
39. Kargo W.J., Giszter S.F. Afferent roles in hindlimb wipe-reflex trajectories: free-limb kinematics and motor patterns. J. Neurophysiol. 83:2000;1480-1501.
40. Kargo W.J., Giszter S.F. Rapid correction of aimed movements by summation of force-field primitives. J. Neurosci. 20:2000;409-426.
41. Bosco G., Poppele R.E. Proprioception from a spinocerebellar perspective. Physiol. Rev. 81:2001;539-568.
42. Bosco G., et al. Representation of passive hindlimb postures in cat spinocerebellar activity. J. Neurophysiol. 76:1996;715-726.
43. Poppele R.E., et al. Independent representations of limb axis length and orientation in spinocerebellar response components. J. Neurophysiol. 87:2002;409-422.
44. Johnson M.T., et al. Central processes for the multiparametric control of arm movements in primates. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 11:2001;684-688.
45. Kalaska J.F., et al. Cortical control of reaching movements. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 7:1997;849-859.
46. Schwartz A.B. Distributed motor processing in cerebral cortex. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 4:1994;840-846.
47. Ghez C., et al. Organization of voluntary movement. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 1:1991;664-671.
48. Georgopoulos A.P. Current issues in directional motor control. Trends Neurosci. 18:1995;506-510.
49. Todorov E. Direct cortical control of muscle activation in voluntary arm movements: a model. Nat. Neurosci. 3:2000;391-398.
50. Scott S.H. Reply to 'One motor cortex, two different views'. Nat. Neurosci. 3:2000;964-965.
51. Georgopoulos A.P., Ashe J. One motor cortex, two different views. Nat. Neurosci. 3:2000;963.
52. Moran D.W., Schwartz A.B. One motor cortex, two different views. Nat. Neurosci. 3:2000;963.
53. Todorov E. Reply to 'One motor cortex, two different views'. Nat. Neurosci. 2000;3963-3964.
54. Grobstein P. Between the retinotectal projection and directed movement: topography of a sensorimotor interface. Brain Behav. Evol. 31:1988;34-48.
55. Kostyk S.K., Grobstein P. Neuronal organization underlying visually elicited prey orienting in the frog-I. Effects of various unilateral lesions. Neuroscience. 21:1987;41-55.
56. Grasso R., et al. Motor patterns for human gait: backward versus forward locomotion. J. Neurophysiol. 80:1998;1868-1885.
57. Ivanenko Y.P., et al. Control of foot trajectory in human locomotion: role of ground contact forces in simulated reduced gravity. J. Neurophysiol. 87:2002;3070-3089.
58. Grasso R., et al. Interactions between posture and locomotion: motor patterns in humans walking with bent posture versus erect posture. J. Neurophysiol. 83:2000;288-300.
59. Winter D.A., Yack H.J. EMG profiles during normal human walking: stride-to-stride and inter-subject variability. Electromyogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. 67:1987;402-411.
60. Davis B.L., Vaughan C.L. Phasic behavior of EMG signals during gait: Use of multivariate statistics. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 3:1993;51-60.
61. McCrea D.A. Spinal circuitry of sensorimotor control of locomotion. J. Physiol. (Lond.). 533:2001;41-50.
62. Prochazka A. The fuzzy logic of visuomotor control. Can J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 74:1996;456-462.
63. Lacquaniti F., et al. Motor patterns in walking. News Physiol. Sci. 14:1999;168-174.
64. Yakovenko S., et al. Spatiotemporal activation of lumbosacral motoneurons in the locomotor step cycle. J. Neurophysiol. 87:2002;1542-1553.
65. Nichols T.R. A biomechanical perspective on spinal mechanisms of coordinated muscular action: an architecture principle. Acta Anat. (Basel). 151:1994;1-13.
66. Shen L., Poppele R.E. Kinematic analysis of cat hindlimb stepping. J. Neurophysiol. 74:1995;2266-2280.
67. Lacquaniti F., Maioli C. Independent control of limb position and contact forces in cat posture. J. Neurophysiol. 72:1994;1476-1495.
68. Dietz V. Do human bipeds use quadrupedal coordination? Trends Neurosci. 25:2002;462-467.
69. Dietz V. Spinal cord lesion: effects of and perspectives for treatment. Neural Plast. 8:2001;83-90.
70. de Leon R.D., et al. Is the recovery of stepping following spinal cord injury mediated by modifying existing neural pathways or by generating new pathways? A perspective. Phys. Ther. 81:2001;1904-1911.
71. Barbeau H., et al. Tapping into spinal circuits to restore motor function. Brain Res. Brain Res. Rev. 30:1999;27-51.
72. Pearson K.G. Could enhanced reflex function contribute to improving locomotion after spinal cord repair? J. Physiol. (Lond.). 533:2001;75-81.