Motor lateralization is characterized by a serial hybrid control scheme

Handy divisions: Hand-specific specialization of prehensile control in bimanual tasks

When hammering a nail, why do right-handers wield the hammer in the right hand? The complementary dominance theory suggests a somewhat surprising answer. The two hands are specialized for different types of tasks: the dominant for manipulating objects, and the non-dominant for stabilizing objects. Right-handers wield the moving object with their right hand to leverage the skills of both hands. Functional specialization in hand use is often illustrated using examples of object manipulation. However, the complementary dominance theory is supported by wrist kinematics rather than object manipulation data. Therefore, our goal was to determine whether this theory extends to object manipulation. We hypothesized that hand-specific differences will be evident in the kinematics of hand-held objects and in the control of grip forces in right-handed individuals. Right-handed participants held two instrumented objects that were coupled by a spring. They moved one object while stabilizing the other object in various bimanual tasks. They performed motions of varying difficulty by tracking predictable or unpredictable targets. The two hands switched roles (stabilization vs movement) in various experimental blocks. The changing spring length perturbed both objects. We quantified the movement performance by measuring the objects' positions, and grip force control by measuring grip-load coupling in the moving hand and mean grip force in the stabilizing hand. The right hand produced more accurate object movement, along with stronger grip-load coupling, indicating superior predictive control of the right hand. In contrast, the left hand stabilized the object better and exerted a higher grip force, indicating superior impedance control of the left hand. Task difficulty had a weak effect on grip-load coupling during object movement and no effect on mean grip force during object stabilization. These behavioral results demonstrate that complementary dominance extends to object manipulation, though the weak effect of task difficulty on grip characteristics warrants further investigation. Neurophysiological investigations can now examine the hemisphere-specific neural mechanisms underlying these behavioral differences.

The complementary dominance hypothesis: a model for remediating the 'good' hand in stroke survivors

The complementary dominance hypothesis is a novel model of motor lateralization substantiated by decades of research examining interlimb differences in the control of upper extremity movements in neurotypical adults and hemisphere-specific motor deficits in stroke survivors. In contrast to earlier ideas that attribute handedness to the specialization of one hemisphere, our model proposes complementary motor control specializations in each hemisphere. The dominant hemisphere mediates optimal control of limb dynamics as required for smooth and efficient movements, whereas the non-dominant hemisphere mediates impedance control, important for countering unexpected mechanical conditions and achieving steady-state limb positions. Importantly, this model proposes that each hemisphere contributes its specialization to both arms (though with greater influence from either arm's contralateral hemisphere) and thus predicts that lesions to one hemisphere should produce hemisphere-specific motor deficits in not only the contralesional arm, but also the ipsilesional arm of stroke survivors - a powerful prediction now supported by a growing body of evidence. Such ipsilesional arm motor deficits vary with contralesional arm impairment, and thus individuals with little to no functional use of the contralesional arm experience both the greatest impairments in the ipsilesional arm, as well as the greatest reliance on it to serve as the main or sole manipulator for activities of daily living. Accordingly, we have proposed and tested a novel intervention that reduces hemisphere-specific ipsilesional arm deficits and thereby improves functional independence in stroke survivors with severe contralesional impairment.

Distribution of control during bimanual movement and stabilization

In two-handed actions like baseball batting, the brain can allocate the control to each arm in an infinite number of ways. According to hemispheric specialization theory, the dominant hemisphere is adept at ballistic control, while the non-dominant hemisphere is specialized at postural stabilization, so the brain should divide the control between the arms according to their respective specialization. Here, we tested this prediction by examining how the brain shares the control between the dominant and non-dominant arms during bimanual reaching and postural stabilization. Participants reached with both hands, which were tied together by a stiff virtual spring, to a target surrounded by an unstable repulsive force field. If the brain exploits each hemisphere's specialization, then the dominant arm should be responsible for acceleration early in the movement, and the non-dominant arm will be the prime actor at the end when holding steady against the force field. The power grasp force, which signifies the postural stability of each arm, peaked at movement termination but was equally large in both arms. Furthermore, the brain predominantly used the arm that could use the stronger flexor muscles to mainly accelerate the movement. These results point to the brain flexibly allocating the control to each arm according to the task goal without adhering to a strict specialization scheme.

Prosthetic home intervention induces cortical plasticity in paediatrics with congenital limb reduction

Paediatrics with congenital upper-limb reduction deficiency often face difficulties with normal development such as motor skills, needing assistance with daily activities such as self-care limitations with certain movements, sports, or activities. The purpose of this non-randomized longitudinal controlled trial was to assess, using intent-to-treat analysis, the effects of an 8-week home intervention of prosthetic use on the sensorimotor cortex in paediatrics with congenital upper-limb reduction deficiency. A paediatric population with congenital upper-limb reduction deficiency (n = 14) who were aged 6-18 years and who had a 20° or greater range of motion in the appropriate joint of the affected arm to move the body-powered prosthesis were enrolled. An age- and sex-matched control group (n = 14) was also enrolled. Participants were non-randomized and fitted with a custom low-cost 3D printed prosthesis and participated in 8 weeks of prosthetic use training at home. Control participants utilized a prosthetic simulator. The home intervention incorporated daily use training and exercises utilizing the prosthesis in direct use and assistive tasks explained by the researchers. After the home intervention, both groups displayed significant improvements in gross manual dexterity. During prosthetic use with the affected limb, significant increases in oxygenated hemodynamic responses were only displayed in the left premotor cortex of the upper-limb reduction deficiency group. The novel findings of this non-randomized longitudinal controlled trial suggest that the intervention may have improved the functional role of the left hemisphere which translated to the improvement of learning direction during adaptation to visuomotor control. The prosthetic home intervention was assumed to provide closed-loop training which could provide a direct benefit to the motor development of paediatrics with upper-limb reduction deficiency.

Symmetric unipedal balance in quiet stance and dynamic tasks in older individuals

Previous evidence of increased difference of muscular strength between the dominant and non-dominant legs in older adults suggests the possibility of dissimilar balance control between the legs (between-leg asymmetry) associated with aging. In the current investigation, we evaluated between-leg asymmetries in older adults when performing quiet and dynamic balance tasks. Fifty-two physically active and healthy older adults within the age range of 60 to 80 years were recruited. Participants performed balance tasks in unipedal stance, including quiet standing and cyclic sway (rhythmic oscillation) of the non-supporting leg in the anteroposterior or mediolateral directions, producing foot displacements with amplitudes of 20 cm paced in 1 Hz through a metronome. Body balance was evaluated through trunk accelerometry, by using the sensors embedded into a smartphone fixed at the height of the 10th-12th thoracic spines. Analysis revealed lack of significant differences in balance control between the legs either when comparing the right versus left or the preferred versus non-preferred legs, regardless of whether they were performing quiet stance or dynamic tasks. Further examination of the data showed high between-leg correlation coefficients (rs range: 0.71-0.84) across all tasks. Then, our results indicated symmetric and associated between-leg balance control in the examined older adults.

Phasic and tonic muscle synergies are different in number, structure and sparseness

In the last two decades, muscle synergies analysis has been commonly used to assess the neurophysiological mechanisms underlying human motor control. Several synergy models and algorithms have been employed for processing the electromyographic (EMG) signal, and it has been shown that the coordination of motor control is characterized by the presence of phasic (movement-related) and tonic (anti-gravity and related to co-contraction) EMG components. Neural substrates indicate that phasic and tonic components have non-homogeneous origin; however, it is still unclear if these components are generated by the same set of synergies or by distinct synergies. This study aims at testing whether phasic and tonic components are generated by distinct phasic and tonic synergies or by the same set of synergies with phasic and tonic activation coefficients. The study also aims at characterizing the differences between the phasic and the tonic synergies. Using a comprehensive mapping of upper-limb point-to-point movements, synergies were extracted from phasic and tonic EMG signal separately, estimating the tonic components with a linear ramp model. The goodness of reconstruction (R2) as a function of the number of synergies was compared, and sets of synergies extracted from each dataset at three R2 threshold levels (0.80, 0.85, 0.90) were retained for further analysis. Then, shared, phasic-specific, and tonic-specific synergies were extracted from the two datasets concatenated. The dimensionality of the synergies shared between the phasic and the tonic datasets was estimated with a bootstrap procedure based on the evaluation of the distribution of principal angles between the subspaces spanned by phasic and tonic synergies due to noise. We found only few shared synergies, indicating that phasic and tonic synergies have in general different structures. To compare consistent differences in synergy composition, shared, phasic-specific, and tonic-specific synergies were clustered separately. Phasic-specific clusters were more numerous than tonic-specific ones, suggesting that they were more differentiated among subjects. The structure of phasic clusters and the higher sparseness indicated that phasic synergies capture specific muscle activation patterns related to the movement while tonic synergies show co-contraction of multiple muscles for joint stabilization and holding postures. These results suggest that in many scenarios phasic and tonic synergies should be extracted separately, especially when performing muscle synergy analysis in patients with abnormal tonic activity and for tuning devices with gravity support.

Effects of Short-Term Novice Archery Training on Reaching Movement Performance and Interlimb Asymmetries

Previous studies showed numerous evidence for the interlimb asymmetries in motor performance during arm reaching movements. Furthermore, these interlimb asymmetries have been shown to associate with spatial patterns of hand selection behavior. Importantly, these interlimb asymmetries can be modified systematically by occlusion of visual feedback, or a long-term sports training. In this study, we asked about the effects of a short-term training on interlimb asymmetries. Eighteen healthy young participants underwent a 12-week novice traditional archery training (TAT). Their unimanual dominant and nondominant arm reaching movement performance was assessed before and after TAT. We found that movement accuracy, movement precision, and movement efficiency in the experimental group have all improved significantly as a result of TAT. These improvements were comparable across both arms, thus the interlimb differences in movement performance were not affected by the short-term TAT and remained similar. These results suggest that while short-term training may contribute positively to reaching performance, it is unlikely to have a significant impact on the differences observed between the dominant and nondominant arms. This unique characteristics of dominant and nondominant arm should be taken into consideration when developing targeted sports and rehabilitation programs for athletes or individuals with acute or chronic motor deficits.

Control of interjoint coordination in the performance of manual circular movements can explain lateral specialization

Between-arm performance asymmetry can be seen in different arm movements requiring specific interjoint coordination to generate the desired hand trajectory. In the current investigation, we assessed between-arm asymmetry of shoulder-elbow coordination and its stability in the performance of circular movements. Participants were 16 healthy right-handed university students. The task consisted of performing cyclic circular movements with either the dominant right arm or the nondominant left arm at movement frequencies ranging from 40% of maximum to maximum frequency in steps of 15%. Kinematic analysis of shoulder and elbow motions was performed through an optoelectronic system in the three-dimensional space. Results showed that as movement frequency increased circularity of left arm movements diminished, taking an elliptical shape, becoming significantly different from the right arm at higher movement frequencies. Shoulder-elbow coordination was found to be asymmetric between the two arms across movement frequencies, with lower shoulder-elbow angle coefficients and higher relative phase for the left compared to the right arm. Results also revealed greater variability of left arm movements in all variables assessed, an outcome observed from low to high movement frequencies. From these findings, we propose that specialization of the left cerebral hemisphere for motor control resides in its higher capacity to generate appropriate and stable interjoint coordination leading to the planned hand trajectory.

The human motor cortex contributes to gravity compensation to maintain posture and during reaching

The neural control of posture and movement is interdependent. During voluntary movement, the neural motor command is executed by the motor cortex through the corticospinal tract and its collaterals and subcortical targets. Here we address the question of whether the control mechanism for the postural adjustments at nonmoving joints is also involved in overcoming gravity at the moving joints. We used single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation to measure the corticospinal excitability in humans during postural and reaching tasks. We hypothesized that the corticospinal excitability is proportional to background muscle activity and the gravity-related joint moments during both static postures and reaching movements. To test this hypothesis, we used visual targets in virtual reality to instruct five postures and three movements with or against gravity. We then measured the amplitude and gain of motor evoked potentials in multiple arm and hand muscles at several phases of the reaching motion and during static postures. The stimulation caused motor evoked potentials in all muscles that were proportional to the muscle activity. During both static postures and reaching movements, the muscle activity and the corticospinal contribution to these muscles changed in proportion with the postural moments needed to support the arm against gravity, supporting the hypothesis. Notably, these changes happened not only in antigravity muscles. Altogether, these results provide evidence that the changes in corticospinal excitability cause muscle cocontraction that modulates limb stiffness. This suggests that the motor cortex is involved in producing postural adjustments that support the arm against gravity during posture maintenance and reaching.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Animal studies suggest that the corticospinal tract and its collaterals are crucial for producing postural adjustments that accompany movement in limbs other than the moving limb. Here we provide evidence for a similar control schema for both arm posture maintenance and gravity compensation during movement of the same limb. The observed interplay between the postural and movement control signals within the corticospinal tract may help explain the underlying neural motor deficits after stroke.

Reaction time asymmetries provide insight into mechanisms underlying dominant and non-dominant hand selection

Handedness is often thought of as a hand "preference" for specific tasks or components of bimanual tasks. Nevertheless, hand selection decisions depend on many factors beyond hand dominance. While these decisions are likely influenced by which hand might show performance advantages for the particular task and conditions, there also appears to be a bias toward the dominant hand, regardless of performance advantage. This study examined the impact of hand selection decisions and workspace location on reaction time and movement quality. Twenty-six neurologically intact participants performed targeted reaching across the horizontal workspace in a 2D virtual reality environment, and we compared reaction time across two groups: those selecting which hand to use on a trial-by-trial basis (termed the choice group) and those performing the task with a preassigned hand (the no-choice group). Along with reaction time, we also compared reach performance for each group across two ipsilateral workspaces: medial and lateral. We observed a significant difference in reaction time between the hands in the choice group, regardless of workspace. In contrast, both hands showed shorter but similar reaction times and differences between the lateral and medial workspaces in the no-choice group. We conclude that the shorter reaction times of the dominant hand under choice conditions may be due to dominant hand bias in the selection process that is not dependent upon interlimb performance differences.

Ipsilesional arm training in severe stroke to improve functional independence (IPSI): phase II protocol

BACKGROUND

We previously characterized hemisphere-specific motor control deficits in the ipsilesional, less-impaired arm of unilaterally lesioned stroke survivors. Our preliminary data indicate these deficits are substantial and functionally limiting in patients with severe paresis.

METHODS

We have designed an intervention ("IPSI") to remediate the hemisphere-specific deficits in the ipsilesional arm, using a virtual-reality platform, followed by manipulation training with a variety of real objects, designed to facilitate generalization and transfer to functional behaviors encountered in the natural environment. This is a 2-site (primary site - Penn State College of Medicine, secondary site - University of Southern California), two-group randomized intervention with an experimental group, which receives unilateral training of the ipsilesional arm throughout 3 one-hour sessions per week for 5 weeks, through our Virtual Reality and Manipulation Training (VRMT) protocol. Our control group receives a conventional intervention on the contralesional arm, 3 one-hour sessions per week for 5 weeks, guided by recently released practice guidelines for upper limb rehabilitation in adult stroke. The study aims to include a total of 120 stroke survivors (60 per group) whose stroke was in the territory of the middle cerebral artery (MCA) resulting in severe upper-extremity motor impairments. Outcome measures (Primary: Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test, Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Abilhand, Barthel Index) are assessed at five evaluation points: Baseline 1, Baseline 2, immediate post-intervention (primary endpoint), and 3-weeks (short-term retention) and 6-months post-intervention (long-term retention). We hypothesize that both groups will improve performance of the targeted arm, but that the ipsilesional arm remediation group will show greater improvements in functional independence.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study are expected to inform upper limb evaluation and treatment to consider ipsilesional arm function, as part of a comprehensive physical rehabilitation strategy that includes evaluation and remediation of both arms.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration ID: NCT03634397 ; date of registration: 08/16/2018).

Muscle effort is best minimized by the right-dominant arm in the gravity field

The central nervous system (CNS) develops motor strategies that minimize various hidden criteria, such as end-point variance or effort. A large body of literature suggests that the dominant arm is specialized for such open-loop optimization-like processes, whilst the non-dominant arm is specialized for closed-loop postural control. Building on recent results suggesting that the brain plans arm movements that take advantage of gravity effects to minimize muscle effort, the present study tests the hypothesized superiority of the dominant arm motor system for effort minimization. Thirty participants (22.5 ± 2.1 years old; all right-handed) performed vertical arm movements between two targets (40° amplitude), in two directions (upwards and downwards) with their two arms (dominant and non-dominant). We recorded the arm kinematics and electromyographic activities of the anterior and posterior deltoid to compare two motor signatures of the gravity-related optimization process; i.e., directional asymmetries and negative epochs on phasic muscular activity. We found that these motor signatures were still present during movements performed with the non-dominant arm, indicating that the effort-minimization process also occurs for the non-dominant motor system. However, these markers were reduced compared with movements performed with the dominant arm. This difference was especially prominent during downward movements, where the optimization of gravity effects occurs early in the movement. Assuming that the dominant arm is optimal to minimize muscle effort, as demonstrated by previous studies, the present results support the hypothesized superiority of the dominant arm motor system for effort-minimization.

Neural Control of Stopping and Stabilizing the Arm

Stopping is a crucial yet under-studied action for planning and producing meaningful and efficient movements. In this review, we discuss classical human psychophysics studies as well as those using engineered systems that aim to develop models of motor control of the upper limb. We present evidence for a hybrid model of motor control, which has an evolutionary advantage due to division of labor between cerebral hemispheres. Stopping is a fundamental aspect of movement that deserves more attention in research than it currently receives. Such research may provide a basis for understanding arm stabilization deficits that can occur following central nervous system (CNS) damage.

A rare case of deafferentation reveals an essential role of proprioception in bilateral coordination

Loss of proprioception has been shown to produce deficits in intralimb coordination and in the ability to stabilize limb posture in the absence of visual feedback. However, the role of proprioceptive signals in the feedforward and feedback control of interlimb coordination remains unclear. To address this issue, we examined bimanual coordination in a deafferented participant (DP) with large-fiber sensory neuropathy, which resulted in the loss of proprioception and touch in both arms, and in age-matched control participants. The task required participants to move a single virtual bar with both hands to a rectangular target with horizontal orientation. The participants received visual feedback of the virtual bar, but not of the hand positions along the bar-axis. Although the task required symmetrical movement between the arms, there were significant differences in the trajectories of the dominant and non-dominant hands in the deafferented participant, and thus more final errors and impaired coordination compared to controls. Deafferentation was also associated with an asymmetric deficit in stabilizing the hand at the end of motion, where the dominant arm showed more drift than the non-dominant arm. While the findings with DP may reflect a unique adaptation to deafferentation, they suggest that 1) Bilateral coordination depends on proprioceptive feedback, and 2) Postural stability at the end of motion can be specified through feedforward mechanisms, in the absence of proprioceptive feedback, but this process appears to be asymmetric, with better stability in the non-dominant arm.

Similar stretch reflexes and behavioral patterns are expressed by the dominant and nondominant arms during postural control

Limb dominance is evident in many daily activities, leading to the prominent idea that each hemisphere of the brain specializes in controlling different aspects of movement. Past studies suggest that the dominant arm is primarily controlled via an internal model of limb dynamics that enables the nervous system to produce efficient movements. In contrast, the nondominant arm may be primarily controlled via impedance mechanisms that rely on the strong modulation of sensory feedback from individual joints to control limb posture. We tested whether such differences are evident in behavioral responses and stretch reflexes following sudden displacement of the arm during posture control. Experiment 1 applied specific combinations of elbow-shoulder torque perturbations (the same for all participants). Peak joint displacements, return times, end point accuracy, and the directional tuning and amplitude of stretch reflexes in nearly all muscles were not statistically different between the two arms. Experiment 2 induced specific combinations of joint motion (the same for all participants). Again, peak joint displacements, return times, end point accuracy, and the directional tuning and amplitude of stretch reflexes in nearly all muscles did not differ statistically when countering the imposed loads with each arm. Moderate to strong correlations were found between stretch reflexes and behavioral responses to the perturbations with the two arms across both experiments. Collectively, the results do not support the idea that the dominant arm specializes in exploiting internal models and the nondominant arm in impedance control by increasing reflex gains to counter sudden loads imposed on the arms during posture control.NEW & NOTEWORTHY A prominent hypothesis is that the nervous system controls the dominant arm through predictive internal models and the nondominant arm through impedance mechanisms. We tested whether stretch reflexes of muscles in the two arms also display such specialization during posture control. Nearly all behavioral responses and stretch reflexes did not differ statistically but were strongly correlated between the arms. The results indicate individual signatures of feedback control that are common for the two arms.

Interlimb differences in visuomotor and dynamic adaptation during targeted reaching in children

While a number of studies have focused on movement (a)symmetries between the arms in adults, less is known about movement asymmetries in typically developing children. The goal of this study was to examine interlimb differences in children when adapting to novel visuomotor and dynamic conditions while performing a center-out reaching task. We tested 13 right-handed children aged 9-11 years old. Prior to movement, one of eight targets arranged radially around the start position was randomly displayed. Movements were made either with the right (dominant) arm or the left (nondominant) arm. The children participated in two experiments separated by at least one week. In one experiment, subjects were exposed to a rotated visual display (30° about the start circle); and in the other, a 1 kg mass (attached eccentrically to the forearm axis). Each experiment consisted of three blocks: pre-exposure, exposure and post-exposure. Three measures of task performance were calculated from hand trajectory data: hand-path deviation from the straight target line, direction error at peak velocity and final position error. Results showed that during visuomotor adaptation, no interlimb differences were observed for any of the three measures. During dynamic adaptation, however, a significant difference between the arms was observed at the first cycle during dynamic adaptation. With regard to the aftereffects observed during the post-exposure block, direction error data indicate considerably large aftereffects for both arms during visuomotor adaptation; and there was a significant difference between the arms, resulting in substantially larger aftereffects for the right arm. Similarly, dynamic adaptation results also showed a significant difference between the arms; and post hoc analyses indicated that aftereffects were present only for the right arm. Collectively, these findings indicate that the dominant arm advantage for developing an internal model associated with a novel visuomotor or dynamic transform, as previously shown in young adults, may already be apparent at 9 to 11-year old children.

When the non-dominant arm dominates: the effects of visual information and task experience on speed-accuracy advantages

Speed accuracy trade-off, the inverse relationship between movement speed and task accuracy, is a ubiquitous feature of skilled motor performance. Many previous studies have focused on the dominant arm, unimanual performance in both simple tasks, such as target reaching, and complex tasks, such as overarm throwing. However, while handedness is a prominent feature of human motor performance, the effect of limb dominance on speed-accuracy relationships is not well-understood. Based on previous research, we hypothesize that dominant arm skilled performance should depend on visual information and prior task experience, and that the non-dominant arm should show greater skill when no visual information nor prior task information is available. Forty right-handed young adults reached to 32 randomly presented targets across a virtual reality workspace with either the left or the right arm. Half of the participants received no visual feedback about hand position throughout each reach. Sensory information and task experience were lowest during the first cycle of exposure (32 reaches) in the no-vision condition, in which visual information about motion was not available. Under this condition, we found that the left arm group showed greater skill, measured in terms of position error normalized to speed, and by error variability. However, as task experience and sensory information increased, the right arm group showed substantial improvements in speed-accuracy relations, while the left arm group maintained, but did not improve, speed-accuracy relations throughout the task. These differences in performance between dominant and non-dominant arm groups during the separate stages of the task are consistent with complimentary models of lateralization, which propose different proficiencies of each hemisphere for different features of control. Our results are incompatible with global dominance models of handedness that propose dominant arm advantages under all performance conditions.

Are the Predictions of the Dynamic Dominance Model of Laterality Applicable to Children?

According to the dynamic dominance model, the left cerebral hemisphere is specialized for the control of intersegmental dynamics and the right hemisphere for impedance control. Our aim was to test predictions from the dynamic dominance model in children by comparing performance between the right (preferred) and left hands in aiming. Three groups were compared: 4-7, 8-11, and 18-38 years old. Results showed higher movement linearity in the performance with the right hand in all age groups (P < .01), while initial directional error and endpoint accuracy were equivalent between hands. These results provided partial support for the dynamic dominance model.

Asymmetric interlateral transfer of motor learning in unipedal dynamic balance

Interlateral transfer of learning between the legs in body balance training is a topic of theoretical and practical interest, but it has been left untouched in previous research. In this investigation, we aimed to evaluate the magnitude and asymmetry of interlateral transfer of balance stability following the practice of a challenging task of unipedal support on an unstable base. Thirty participants (18-30 years old) were assigned to two groups practicing either with the right or the left leg. Training consisted of a single practice session of unipedal balance on a platform free to sway in the anteroposterior direction. Balance time (off ground) of either leg in 10-s trials was compared across pre-test, post-test, and 7-day retention. Post-test indicated that both groups had similar performance gains with the trained leg, and equivalent transfer to the transfer leg. Analysis of retention indicated further balance improvement with both transfer legs, while practice with the right leg led to the superior transfer to the untrained leg as compared to the opposite transfer direction. These results suggest that persistent transfer of learning effects for unipedal dynamic balance is bilateral but more prominent in the right-to-left direction.

The neural foundations of handedness: insights from a rare case of deafferentation

The role of proprioceptive feedback on motor lateralization remains unclear. We asked whether motor lateralization is dependent on proprioceptive feedback by examining a rare case of proprioceptive deafferentation (GL). Motor lateralization is thought to arise from asymmetries in neural organization, particularly at the cortical level. For example, we have previously provided evidence that the left hemisphere mediates optimal motor control that allows execution of smooth and efficient arm trajectories, while the right hemisphere mediates impedance control that can achieve stable and accurate final arm postures. The role of proprioception in both of these processes has previously been demonstrated empirically, bringing into question whether loss of proprioception will disrupt lateralization of motor performance. In this study, we assessed whether the loss of online sensory information produces deficits in integrating specific control contributions from each hemisphere by using a reaching task to examine upper limb kinematics in GL and five age-matched controls. Behavioral findings revealed differential deficits in the control of the left and right hands in GL and performance deficits in each of GL's hands compared with controls. Computational simulations can explain the behavioral results as a disruption in the integration of postural and trajectory control mechanisms when no somatosensory information is available. This rare case of proprioceptive deafferentation provides insights into developing a more accurate understanding of handedness that emphasizes the role of proprioception in both predictive and feedback control mechanisms.NEW & NOTEWORTHY The role of proprioceptive feedback on the lateralization of motor control mechanisms is unclear. We examined upper limb kinematics in a rare case of peripheral deafferentation to determine the role of sensory information in integrating motor control mechanisms from each hemisphere. Our empirical findings and computational simulations showed that the loss of somatosensory information results in an impaired integration of control mechanisms, thus providing support for a complementary dominance hypothesis of handedness.

Differential Changes in Early Somatosensory Evoked Potentials between the Dominant and Non-Dominant Hand, Following a Novel Motor Tracing Task

During training in a novel dynamic environment, the non-dominant upper limb favors feedback control, whereas the dominant limb favors feedforward mechanisms. Early somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) offer a means to explore differences in cortical regions involved in sensorimotor integration (SMI). This study sought to compare differences in SMI between the right (Dom) and left (Non-Dom) hand in healthy right-handed participants. SEPs were recorded in response to median nerve stimulation, at baseline and post, a motor skill acquisition-tracing task. One group (n = 12) trained with their Dom hand and the other group (n = 12), with their Non-Dom hand. The Non-Dom hand was significantly more accurate at baseline (p < 0.0001) and both groups improved with time (p < 0.0001), for task accuracy, with no significant interaction effect between groups for both post-acquisition and retention. There were significant group interactions for the N24 (p < 0.001) and the N30 (p < 0.0001) SEP peaks. Post motor acquisition, the Dom hand had a 28.9% decrease in the N24 and a 23.8% increase in the N30, with opposite directional changes for the Non-Dom hand; 22.04% increase in N24 and 24% decrease in the N30. These SEP changes reveal differences in early SMI between Dom and Non-Dom hands in response to motor acquisition, providing objective, temporally sensitive measures of differences in neural mechanisms between the limbs.

Stochastic optimal open-loop control as a theory of force and impedance planning via muscle co-contraction

Understanding the underpinnings of biological motor control is an important issue in movement neuroscience. Optimal control theory is a leading framework to rationalize this problem in computational terms. Previously, optimal control models have been devised either in deterministic or in stochastic settings to account for different aspects of motor control (e.g. average behavior versus trial-to-trial variability). While these approaches have yielded valuable insights about motor control, they typically fail in explaining muscle co-contraction. Co-contraction of a group of muscles associated to a motor function (e.g. agonist and antagonist muscles spanning a joint) contributes to modulate the mechanical impedance of the neuromusculoskeletal system (e.g. joint viscoelasticity) and is thought to be mainly under the influence of descending signals from the brain. Here we present a theory suggesting that one primary goal of motor planning may be to issue feedforward (open-loop) motor commands that optimally specify both force and impedance, according to noisy neuromusculoskeletal dynamics and to optimality criteria based on effort and variance. We show that the proposed framework naturally accounts for several previous experimental findings regarding the regulation of force and impedance via muscle co-contraction in the upper-limb. Stochastic optimal (closed-loop) control, preprogramming feedback gains but requiring on-line state estimation processes through long-latency sensory feedback loops, may then complement this nominal feedforward motor command to fully determine the limb’s mechanical impedance. The proposed stochastic optimal open-loop control theory may provide new insights about the general articulation of feedforward/feedback control mechanisms and justify the occurrence of muscle co-contraction in the neural control of movement.

This study presents a novel computational theory to explain the planning of force and impedance (e.g. viscoelasticity) in the neural control of movement. It assumes that one main goal of motor planning is to elaborate feedforward motor commands that determine both the force and the impedance required for the task at hand. These feedforward motor commands (i.e. that are defined prior to movement execution) are designed to minimize effort and variance costs considering the uncertainty arising from sensorimotor or environmental noise. A major outcome of this mathematical framework is the explanation of muscle co-contraction (i.e. the concurrent contraction of a group of muscles involved in a motor function). Muscle co-contraction has been shown to occur in many situations but previous modeling works struggled to account for it. Although effortful, co-contraction contributes to increase the robustness of motor behavior (e.g. small variance) upstream of sophisticated optimal closed-loop control processes that require state estimation from delayed sensory feedback to function. This work may have implications regarding our understanding of the neural control of movement in computational terms. It also provides a theoretical ground to explain how to optimally plan force and impedance within a general and versatile framework.

Interlimb differences in coordination of rapid wrist/forearm movements

We have previously proposed a model of motor lateralization that attributes specialization for predictive control of intersegmental coordination to the dominant hemisphere/limb system, and control of limb impedance to the non-dominant system. This hypothesis was developed based on visually targeted discrete reaching movement made predominantly with the shoulder and elbow joints. The purpose of this experiment was to determine whether dominant arm advantages for multi-degree of freedom coordination also occur during continuous distal movements of the wrist that do not involve visual guidance. In other words, are the advantages of the dominant arm restricted to controlling intersegmental coordination during discrete visually targeted reaching movements, or are they more generally related to coordination of multiple degrees of freedom at other joints, regardless of whether the movements are discrete or invoke visual guidance? Eight right-handed participants were instructed to perform alternating wrist ulnar/radial deviation movements at two instructed speeds, slow and fast, with the dominant or the non-dominant arm, and were instructed not to rotate the forearm (pronation/supination) or move the wrist up and down (flexion/extension). This was explained by slowly and passively moving the wrist in each plane during the instructions. Because all the muscles that cross the wrist have moment arms with respect to more than one axis of rotation, intermuscular coordination is required to prevent motion about non-instructed axes of rotation. We included two conditions, a very slow condition, as a control condition, to demonstrate understanding of the task, and an as-fast-as-possible condition to challenge predictive aspect of control, which we hypothesize are specialized to the dominant controller. Our results indicated that during as-fast-as-possible conditions the non-dominant arm incorporated significantly more non-instructed motion, which resulted in greater circumduction at the non-dominant than the dominant wrist. These findings extend the dynamic dominance hypothesis, indicating that the dominant hemisphere-arm system is specialized for predictive control of multiple degrees of freedom, even in movements of the distal arm and made in the absence of visual guidance.

Postural control of arm and fingers through integration of movement commands

Every movement ends in a period of stillness. Current models assume that commands that hold the limb at a target location do not depend on the commands that moved the limb to that location. Here, we report a surprising relationship between movement and posture in primates: on a within-trial basis, the commands that hold the arm and finger at a target location depend on the mathematical integration of the commands that moved the limb to that location. Following damage to the corticospinal tract, both the move and hold period commands become more variable. However, the hold period commands retain their dependence on the integral of the move period commands. Thus, our data suggest that the postural controller possesses a feedforward module that uses move commands to calculate a component of hold commands. This computation may arise within an unknown subcortical system that integrates cortical commands to stabilize limb posture.

Proprioceptive identification of joint position versus kinaesthetic movement reproduction

Regarding our voluntary control of movement, if identification of joint position, that is independent of the starting condition, is stronger than kinaesthetic movement reproduction, that implies knowledge of the starting position and movement's length for accuracy, is still a matter of debate in motor control theories and neuroscience. In the present study, we examined the mechanisms that individuals seem to prefer/adopt when they locate spatial positions and code the amplitude of movements. We implemented a joint position matching task on a wrist robotic device: this task consists in replicating (i.e. matching) a reference joint angle in the absence of vision and the proprioceptive acuity is given by the goodness of such matching. Two experiments were carried out by implementing two different versions of the task and performed by two groups of 15 healthy participants. In the first experiment, blindfolded subjects were asked to perform matching movements towards a fixed target position, experienced with passive movements that started from different positions and had different lengths. In the second experiment, blindfolded subjects were requested to accurately match target positions that had a different location in space but were passively shown through movements of the same length. We found a clear evidence for higher performances in terms of accuracy (0.42±0.011/°) and precision (0.43±0.011/°) in the first experiment, therefore in case of matching positions, rather than in the second where accuracy and precision were lower (0.36±0.011/° and 0.35±0.011/° respectively). These results suggested a preference for proprioceptive identification of joint position rather than kinaesthetic movement reproduction.

Handedness results from complementary hemispheric dominance, not global hemispheric dominance: evidence from mechanically coupled bilateral movements

Two contrasting views of handedness can be described as 1) complementary dominance, in which each hemisphere is specialized for different aspects of motor control, and 2) global dominance, in which the hemisphere contralateral to the dominant arm is specialized for all aspects of motor control. The present study sought to determine which motor lateralization hypothesis best predicts motor performance during common bilateral task of stabilizing an object (e.g., bread) with one hand while applying forces to the object (e.g., slicing) using the other hand. We designed an experimental equivalent of this task, performed in a virtual environment with the unseen arms supported by frictionless air-sleds. The hands were connected by a spring, and the task was to maintain the position of one hand while moving the other hand to a target. Thus the reaching hand was required to take account of the spring load to make smooth and accurate trajectories, while the stabilizer hand was required to impede the spring load to keep a constant position. Right-handed subjects performed two task sessions (right-hand reach and left-hand stabilize; left-hand reach and right-hand stabilize) with the order of the sessions counterbalanced between groups. Our results indicate a hand by task-component interaction such that the right hand showed straighter reaching performance whereas the left hand showed more stable holding performance. These findings provide support for the complementary dominance hypothesis and suggest that the specializations of each cerebral hemisphere for impedance and dynamic control mechanisms are expressed during bilateral interactive tasks. NEW & NOTEWORTHY We provide evidence for interlimb differences in bilateral coordination of reaching and stabilizing functions, demonstrating an advantage for the dominant and nondominant arms for distinct features of control. These results provide the first evidence for complementary specializations of each limb-hemisphere system for different aspects of control within the context of a complementary bilateral task.

Control of wrist movement in deafferented man: evidence for a mixed strategy of position and amplitude control

There is a continuing debate about control of voluntary movement, with conflicted evidence about the balance between control of movement vectors (amplitude control) that implies knowledge of the starting position for accuracy, and equilibrium point or final position control, that is independent of the starting conditions. We tested wrist flexion and extension movements in a man with a chronic peripheral neuronopathy that deprived him of proprioceptive knowledge of his wrist angles. In a series of experiments, we demonstrate that he could scale the amplitude of his wrist movements in flexion/extension, even without visual feedback, and appeared to adopt a strategy of moving via a central wrist position when asked to reach target angles from unknown start locations. When examining the relationship between positional error at the start and end of each movement in long sequences of movements, we report that he appears to have three canonical positions that he can reach relatively successfully, in flexion, in extension and in the centre. These are consistent with end-point or position control. Other positions were reached with errors that suggest amplitude control. Recording wrist flexor and extensor EMG confirmed that the flexion and extension canonical positions were reached by strong flexor and extensor activity, without antagonist activity, and other positions were reached with graded muscle activation levels. The central canonical position does not appear to be reached by either maximal co-contraction or by complete relaxation, but may have been reached by matched low-level co-contraction.

Interlimb differences in coordination of unsupported reaching movements

Previous research suggests that interlimb differences in coordination associated with handedness might result from specialized control mechanisms that are subserved by different cerebral hemispheres. Based largely on the results of horizontal plane reaching studies, we have proposed that the hemisphere contralateral to the dominant arm is specialized for predictive control of limb dynamics, while the non-dominant hemisphere is specialized for controlling limb impedance. The current study explores interlimb differences in control of 3-D unsupported reaching movements. While the task was presented in the horizontal plane, participant's arms were unsupported and free to move within a range of the vertical axis, which was redundant to the task plane. Results indicated significant dominant arm advantages for both initial direction accuracy and final position accuracy. The dominant arm showed greater excursion along a redundant axis that was perpendicular to the task, and parallel to gravitational forces. In contrast, the non-dominant arm better impeded motion out of the task-plane. Nevertheless, non-dominant arm task errors varied substantially more with shoulder rotation excursion than did dominant arm task errors. These findings suggest that the dominant arm controller was able to take advantage of the redundant degrees of freedom of the task, while non-dominant task errors appeared enslaved to motion along the redundant axis. These findings are consistent with a dominant controller that is specialized for intersegmental coordination, and a non-dominant controller that is specialized for impedance control. However, the findings are inconsistent with previously documented conclusions from planar tasks, in which non-dominant control leads to greater final position accuracy.

Distinct neural circuits for control of movement vs. holding still

In generating a point-to-point movement, the brain does more than produce the transient commands needed to move the body part; it also produces the sustained commands that are needed to hold the body part at its destination. In the oculomotor system, these functions are mapped onto two distinct circuits: a premotor circuit that specializes in generating the transient activity that displaces the eyes and a "neural integrator" that transforms that transient input into sustained activity that holds the eyes. Different parts of the cerebellum adaptively control the motor commands during these two phases: the oculomotor vermis participates in fine tuning the transient neural signals that move the eyes, monitoring the activity of the premotor circuit via efference copy, whereas the flocculus participates in controlling the sustained neural signals that hold the eyes, monitoring the activity of the neural integrator. Here, I review the oculomotor literature and then ask whether this separation of control between moving and holding is a design principle that may be shared with other modalities of movement. To answer this question, I consider neurophysiological and psychophysical data in various species during control of head movements, arm movements, and locomotion, focusing on the brain stem, motor cortex, and hippocampus, respectively. The review of the data raises the possibility that across modalities of motor control, circuits that are responsible for producing commands that change the sensory state of a body part are distinct from those that produce commands that maintain that sensory state.

Feedforward compensation for novel dynamics depends on force field orientation but is similar for the left and right arms

There are well-documented differences in the way that people typically perform identical motor tasks with their dominant and the nondominant arms. According to Yadav and Sainburg's (Neuroscience 196: 153-167, 2011) hybrid-control model, this is because the two arms rely to different degrees on impedance control versus predictive control processes. Here, we assessed whether differences in limb control mechanisms influence the rate of feedforward compensation to a novel dynamic environment. Seventy-five healthy, right-handed participants, divided into four subsamples depending on the arm (left, right) and direction of the force field (ipsilateral, contralateral), reached to central targets in velocity-dependent curl force fields. We assessed the rate at which participants developed predictive compensation for the force field using intermittent error-clamp trials and assessed both kinematic errors and initial aiming angles in the field trials. Participants who were exposed to fields that pushed the limb toward ipsilateral space reduced kinematic errors more slowly, built up less predictive field compensation, and relied more on strategic reaiming than those exposed to contralateral fields. However, there were no significant differences in predictive field compensation or kinematic errors between limbs, suggesting that participants using either the left or the right arm could adapt equally well to novel dynamics. It therefore appears that the distinct preferences in control mechanisms typically observed for the dominant and nondominant arms reflect a default mode that is based on habitual functional requirements rather than an absolute limit in capacity to access the controller specialized for the opposite limb.

Lateralized motor control processes determine asymmetry of interlimb transfer

This experiment tested the hypothesis that interlimb transfer of motor performance depends on recruitment of motor control processes that are specialized to the hemisphere contralateral to the arm that is initially trained. Right-handed participants performed a single-joint task, in which reaches were targeted to 4 different distances. While the speed and accuracy was similar for both hands, the underlying control mechanisms used to vary movement speed with distance were systematically different between the arms: the amplitude of the initial acceleration profiles scaled greater with movement speed for the right-dominant arm, while the duration of the initial acceleration profile scaled greater with movement speed for the left-non-dominant arm. These two processes were previously shown to be differentially disrupted by left and right hemisphere damage, respectively. We now hypothesize that task practice with the right arm might reinforce left-hemisphere mechanisms that vary acceleration amplitude with distance, while practice with the left arm might reinforce right-hemisphere mechanisms that vary acceleration duration with distance. We thus predict that following right arm practice, the left arm should show increased contributions of acceleration amplitude to peak velocities, and following left arm practice, the right arm should show increased contributions of acceleration duration to peak velocities. Our findings support these predictions, indicating that asymmetry in interlimb transfer of motor performance, at least in the task used here, depends on recruitment of lateralized motor control processes.

Remodeling of cortical activity for motor control following upper limb loss

OBJECTIVE

Upper extremity loss presents immediate and lasting challenges for motor control. While sensory and motor representations of the amputated limb undergo plasticity to adjacent areas of the sensorimotor homunculus, it remains unclear whether laterality of motor-related activity is affected by neural reorganization following amputation.

METHODS

Using electroencephalography, we evaluated neural activation patterns of formerly right hand dominant persons with upper limb loss (amputees) performing a motor task with their residual right limb, then their sound left limb. We compared activation patterns with left- and right-handed persons performing the same task.

RESULTS

Amputees have involvement of contralateral motor areas when using their sound limb and atypically increased activation of posterior parietal regions when using the affected limb. When using the non-amputated left arm, patterns of activation remains similar to right handed persons using their left arm.

CONCLUSIONS

A remodeling of activations from traditional contralateral motor areas into posterior parietal areas occurs for motor planning and execution when using the amputated limb. This may reflect an amputation-specific adaptation of heightened visuospatial feedback for motor control involving the amputated limb.

SIGNIFICANCE

These results identify a neuroplastic mechanism for motor control in amputees, which may have great relevance to development of motor rehabilitation paradigms and prosthesis adaptation.

Control of Integrated Task Sequences Shapes Components of Reaching

Reaching toward an object usually consists of a sequence of elemental actions. Using a reaching task sequence, the authors investigated how task elements of that sequence affected feedforward and feedback components of the reaching phase of the movement. Nine right-handed adults performed, with their dominant and nondominant hands, 4 tasks of different complexities: a simple reaching task; a reach-to-grasp task; a reach-to-grasp and lift object task; and a reach-to-grasp, lift, and place object task. Results showed that in the reach-to-grasp and lift object task more time was allocated to the feedforward component of the reach phase, while latency between the task elements decreased. We also found between-hand differences, supporting previous findings of increased efficiency of processing planning-related information in the preferred hand. The presence of task-related modifications supports the concept of contextual effects when planning a movement.

Motor Lateralization Provides a Foundation for Predicting and Treating Non-paretic Arm Motor Deficits in Stroke

Brain lateralization is a ubiquitous feature of neural organization across the vertebrate spectrum. We have developed a model of motor lateralization that attributes different motor control processes to each cerebral hemisphere. This bilateral hemispheric model of motor control has successfully predicted hemisphere-specific motor control and motor learning deficits in the ipsilesional, or non-paretic, arm of patients with unilateral stroke. We now show across large number and range of stroke patients that these motor performance deficits in the non-paretic arm of stroke patients vary with both the side of the lesion, as well as with the severity of contralesional impairment. This last point can be functionally devastating for patients with severe contralesional paresis because for these individuals, performance of upper extremity activities of daily living depends primarily and often exclusively on ipsilesional arm function. We present a pilot study focused on improving the speed and coordination of ipsilesional arm function in a convenience sample of three stroke patients with severe contralesional impairment. Over a three-week period, patients received a total of nine 1.5 h sessions of training that included intense practice of virtual reality and real-life tasks. Our results indicated substantial improvements in ipsilesional arm movement kinematics, functional performance, and that these improvements carried over to improve functional independence. In addition, the contralesional arm improved in our measure of contralesional impairment, which was likely due to improved participation in activities of daily living. We discuss of our findings for physical rehabilitation.

Reliability of Visual and Somatosensory Feedback in Skilled Movement: The Role of the Cerebellum

The integration of vision and somatosensation is required to allow for accurate motor behavior. While both sensory systems contribute to an understanding of the state of the body through continuous updating and estimation, how the brain processes unreliable sensory information remains to be fully understood in the context of complex action. Using functional brain imaging, we sought to understand the role of the cerebellum in weighting visual and somatosensory feedback by selectively reducing the reliability of each sense individually during a tool use task. We broadly hypothesized upregulated activation of the sensorimotor and cerebellar areas during movement with reduced visual reliability, and upregulated activation of occipital brain areas during movement with reduced somatosensory reliability. As specifically compared to reduced somatosensory reliability, we expected greater activations of ipsilateral sensorimotor cerebellum for intact visual and somatosensory reliability. Further, we expected that ipsilateral posterior cognitive cerebellum would be affected with reduced visual reliability. We observed that reduced visual reliability results in a trend towards the relative consolidation of sensorimotor activation and an expansion of cerebellar activation. In contrast, reduced somatosensory reliability was characterized by the absence of cerebellar activations and a trend towards the increase of right frontal, left parietofrontal activation, and temporo-occipital areas. Our findings highlight the role of the cerebellum for specific aspects of skillful motor performance. This has relevance to understanding basic aspects of brain functions underlying sensorimotor integration, and provides a greater understanding of cerebellar function in tool use motor control.

Development of kinesthetic-motor and auditory-motor representations in school-aged children

In two experiments using a center-out task, we investigated kinesthetic-motor and auditory-motor integrations in 5- to 12-year-old children and young adults. In experiment 1, participants moved a pen on a digitizing tablet from a starting position to one of three targets (visuo-motor condition), and then to one of four targets without visual feedback of the movement. In both conditions, we found that with increasing age, the children moved faster and straighter, and became less variable in their feedforward control. Higher control demands for movements toward the contralateral side were reflected in longer movement times and decreased spatial accuracy across all age groups. When feedforward control relies predominantly on kinesthesia, 7- to 10-year-old children were more variable, indicating difficulties in switching between feedforward and feedback control efficiently during that age. An inverse age progression was found for directional endpoint error; larger errors increasing with age likely reflect stronger functional lateralization for the dominant hand. In experiment 2, the same visuo-motor condition was followed by an auditory-motor condition in which participants had to move to acoustic targets (either white band or one-third octave noise). Since in the latter directional cues come exclusively from transcallosally mediated interaural time differences, we hypothesized that auditory-motor representations would show age effects. The results did not show a clear age effect, suggesting that corpus callosum functionality is sufficient in children to allow them to form accurate auditory-motor maps already at a young age.

Laterality effects in motor learning by mental practice in right-handers

Converging evidences suggest that mental movement simulation and actual movement production share similar neurocognitive and learning processes. Although a large body of data is available in the literature regarding mental states involving the dominant arm, examinations for the nondominant arm are sparse. Does mental training, through motor-imagery practice, with the dominant arm or the nondominant arm is equally efficient for motor learning? In the current study, we investigated laterality effects in motor learning by motor-imagery practice. Four groups of right-hander adults mentally and physically performed as fast and accurately as possible (speed/accuracy trade-off paradigm) successive reaching movements with their dominant or nondominant arm (physical-training-dominant-arm, mental-training-dominant-arm, physical-training-nondominant-arm, and mental-training-nondominant-arm groups). Movement time was recorded and analyzed before, during, and after the training sessions. We found that physical and mental practice had a positive effect on the motor performance (i.e., decrease in movement time) of both arms through similar learning process (i.e., similar exponential learning curves). However, movement time reduction in the posttest session was significantly higher after physical practice than motor-imagery practice for both arms. More importantly, motor-imagery practice with the dominant arm resulted in larger and more robust improvements in movement speed compared to motor-imagery practice with the nondominant arm. No such improvements were observed in the control group. Our results suggest a superiority of the dominant arm in motor learning by mental practice. We discussed these findings from the perspective of the internal models theory.

Control of discrete bimanual movements: how each hand benefits from the other

Lateralized sensorimotor hand functions are often investigated separately or sequentially for each hand, e.g., in matching tasks, but rarely under more ecological circumstances where both hands move simultaneously. Using a novel bimanual paradigm in 21 young, healthy participants, this study addresses how postulated lateralized control processes of one hand influence control of the other hand across modalities. More specifically, in this paradigm one hand operates under visuomotor conditions, while the other hand receives no visual feedback and operates predominantly under kinesthetic control. Performance of the hand that does not receive visual feedback is compared between when moving alone (unimanual condition) and when moving together with the contralateral visually controlled hand (bimanual condition). Results suggest that during concurrent bimanual movements the 'invisible' hand benefits from specific control proficiencies of the 'visible' hand, indicating crossmodal and interhemispheric sharing of information that complements each hand's own strengths. These findings lend further support to a more differentiated view of functional lateralization of handedness.

Motor asymmetry in elite fencers

The authors previously reported that asymmetrical patterns of hand preference are updated and modified by present sensorimotor conditions. They examined whether participation in long-term training in the upper extremity sport fencing might modify arm selection and performance asymmetries. Eight fencers and eight nonfencers performed reaching movements under 3 experimental conditions: (a) nonchoice right, (b) nonchoice left, and (c) choice, either right or left arm as selected by subject. The nonchoice conditions allowed assessment of potential interlimb differences in movement performance, while the choice condition allowed assessment of the frequency and pattern of arm selection across subject groups. Our findings showed that the athlete group showed substantially greater symmetry in the performance and selection measures. These findings suggest that arm selection and performance asymmetries can be altered by intense long-term practice.

Convergent models of handedness and brain lateralization

The pervasive nature of handedness across human history and cultures is a salient consequence of brain lateralization. This paper presents evidence that provides a structure for understanding the motor control processes that give rise to handedness. According to the Dynamic Dominance Model, the left hemisphere (in right handers) is proficient for processes that predict the effects of body and environmental dynamics, while the right hemisphere is proficient at impedance control processes that can minimize potential errors when faced with unexpected mechanical conditions, and can achieve accurate steady-state positions. This model can be viewed as a motor component for the paradigm of brain lateralization that has been proposed by Rogers et al. (MacNeilage et al., 2009) that is based upon evidence from a wide range of behaviors across many vertebrate species. Rogers proposed a left-hemisphere specialization for well-established patterns of behavior performed in familiar environmental conditions, and a right hemisphere specialization for responding to unforeseen environmental events. The dynamic dominance hypothesis provides a framework for understanding the biology of motor lateralization that is consistent with Roger's paradigm of brain lateralization.

Handedness can be explained by a serial hybrid control scheme

Our previous studies on healthy individuals and stroke patients led us to propose that the dominant and nondominant arms are specialized for distinct motor control processes. We hypothesize that the dominant arm is specialized for predictive control of limb dynamics, and the nondominant arm is specialized for impedance control. We previously introduced a hybrid control scheme to explain lateralization of single-joint elbow movements. In this paper we apply a similar computational framework to explore interlimb differences in multi-joint reaching movements: the movements of both arms are initiated using predictive control mechanisms, and terminated using impedance mechanisms. Four parameters characterize predictive mechanisms, four parameters characterize impedance mechanisms, and the ninth parameter describes the instant of switch between the two modes of control. Based on our hypothesis of motor lateralization, we predict an early switch to impedance control for the nondominant arm, but a late switch, near the end of motion, for the dominant arm. We fit our model to multi-joint reaching movements of each arm, made in the horizontal plane. Our results reveal that the more curved trajectories of the nondominant arm are characterized by an early switch to impedance mechanisms, in the initial phase of motion near peak velocity. In contrast, the trajectories of the dominant arm were best fit, when the switch to impedance mechanisms occurred late in the deceleration phase of motion. These results support a model of motor lateralization in which the dominant controller is specialized for predictive control of task dynamics, while the nondominant arm is specialized for impedance control mechanisms. For the first time, we are able to operationally define handedness expressed during multi-joint movements by applying a computational control model.

Limb dominance results from asymmetries in predictive and impedance control mechanisms

Handedness is a pronounced feature of human motor behavior, yet the underlying neural mechanisms remain unclear. We hypothesize that motor lateralization results from asymmetries in predictive control of task dynamics and in control of limb impedance. To test this hypothesis, we present an experiment with two different force field environments, a field with a predictable magnitude that varies with the square of velocity, and a field with a less predictable magnitude that varies linearly with velocity. These fields were designed to be compatible with controllers that are specialized in predicting limb and task dynamics, and modulating position and velocity dependent impedance, respectively. Because the velocity square field does not change the form of the equations of motion for the reaching arm, we reasoned that a forward dynamic-type controller should perform well in this field, while control of linear damping and stiffness terms should be less effective. In contrast, the unpredictable linear field should be most compatible with impedance control, but incompatible with predictive dynamics control. We measured steady state final position accuracy and 3 trajectory features during exposure to these fields: Mean squared jerk, Straightness, and Movement time. Our results confirmed that each arm made straighter, smoother, and quicker movements in its compatible field. Both arms showed similar final position accuracies, which were achieved using more extensive corrective sub-movements when either arm performed in its incompatible field. Finally, each arm showed limited adaptation to its incompatible field. Analysis of the dependence of trajectory errors on field magnitude suggested that dominant arm adaptation occurred by prediction of the mean field, thus exploiting predictive mechanisms for adaptation to the unpredictable field. Overall, our results support the hypothesis that motor lateralization reflects asymmetries in specific motor control mechanisms associated with predictive control of limb and task dynamics, and modulation of limb impedance.

Dominant vs. nondominant arm advantage in mentally simulated actions in right handers

Although plentiful data are available regarding mental states involving the dominant-right arm, the evidence for the nondominant-left arm is sparse. Here, we investigated whether right-handers can generate accurate predictions with either the right or the left arm. Fifteen adults carried out actual and mental arm movements in two directions with varying inertial resistance (inertial anisotropy phenomenon). We recorded actual and mental movement times and used the degree of their similarity as an indicator for the accuracy of motor imagery/prediction process. We found timing correspondences (isochrony) between actual and mental right arm movements in both rightward (low inertia resistance) and leftward (high inertia resistance) directions. Timing similarities between actual and mental left arm movements existed for the leftward direction (low inertia resistance) but not for the rightward direction (high inertia resistance). We found similar results when participants reaching towards the midline of the workspace, a result that excludes a hemispace effect. Electromyographic analysis during mental movements showed that arm muscles remained inactivate, thus eliminating a muscle activation strategy that could explain intermanual differences. Furthermore, motor-evoked potentials enhancement in both right and left biceps brachii during mental actions indicated that subjects were actively engaged in mental movement simulation and that the disadvantage of the left arm cannot be attributed to the nonactivation of the right motor cortex. Our findings suggest that predictive mechanisms are more robust for the right than the left arm in right-handers. We discussed these findings from the perspective of the internal models theory and the dynamic-dominance hypothesis of laterality.

Movement variability near goal equivalent manifolds: fluctuations, control, and model-based analysis

Fluctuations in the repeated performance of human movements have been the subject of intense scrutiny because they are generally believed to contain important information about the function and health of the neuromotor system. A variety of approaches has been brought to bear to study these fluctuations. However it is frequently difficult to understand how to synthesize different perspectives to give a coherent picture. Here, we describe a conceptual framework for the experimental study of motor variability that helps to unify geometrical methods, which focus on the role of motor redundancy, with dynamical methods that characterize the error-correcting processes regulating the performance of skilled tasks. We describe how goal functions, which mathematically specify the task strategy being employed, together with ideas from the control of redundant systems, allow one to formulate simple, experimentally testable dynamical models of inter-trial fluctuations. After reviewing the basic theory, we present a list of five general hypotheses on the structure of fluctuations that can be expected in repeated trials of goal-directed tasks. We review recent experimental applications of this general approach, and show how it can be used to precisely characterize the error-correcting control used by human subjects.

The effects of brain lateralization on motor control and adaptation

Lateralization of mechanisms mediating functions such as language and perception is widely accepted as a fundamental feature of neural organization. Recent research has revealed that a similar organization exists for the control of motor actions, in that each brain hemisphere contributes unique control mechanisms to the movements of each arm. The authors review present research that addresses the nature of the control mechanisms that are lateralized to each hemisphere and how they impact motor adaptation and learning. In general, the studies suggest an enhanced role for the left hemisphere during adaptation, and the learning of new sequences and skills. The authors suggest that this specialization emerges from a left hemisphere specialization for predictive control-the ability to effectively plan and coordinate motor actions, possibly by optimizing certain cost functions. In contrast, right hemisphere circuits appear to be important for updating ongoing actions and stopping at a goal position, through modulation of sensorimotor stabilization mechanisms such as reflexes. The authors also propose that each brain hemisphere contributes its mechanism to the control of both arms. They also discuss the potential advantages of such a lateralized control system.

Rethinking motor lateralization: specialized but complementary mechanisms for motor control of each arm

Motor lateralization in humans has primarily been characterized as “handedness”, resulting in the view that one arm-hemisphere system is specialized for all aspects of movement while the other is simply a weaker analogue. We have proposed an alternative view that motor lateralization reflects proficiency of each arm for complementary functions that arises from a specialization of each hemisphere for distinct movement control mechanisms. However, before this idea of hemispheric specialization can be accepted, it is necessary to precisely identify these distinct, lateralized mechanisms. Here we show in right-handers that dominant arm movements rely on predictive mechanisms that anticipate and account for the dynamic properties of the arm, while the non-dominant arm optimizes positional stability by specifying impedance around equilibrium positions. In a targeted-reaching paradigm, we covertly and occasionally shifted the hand starting location either orthogonal to or collinear with a particular direction of movement. On trials on which the start positions were shifted orthogonally, we did not notice any strong interlimb differences. However, on trials on which start positions were shifted orthogonally, the dominant arm largely maintained the direction and straightness of its trajectory, while the non-dominant arm deviated towards the previously learned goal position, consistent with the hypothesized control specialization of each arm-hemisphere system. These results bring together two competing theories about mechanisms of movement control, and suggest that they coexist in the brain in different hemispheres. These findings also question the traditional view of handedness, because specialized mechanisms for each arm-hemisphere system were identified within a group of right-handers. It is likely that such hemispheric specialization emerged to accommodate increasing motor complexity during evolution.