Primary motor cortex and fast feedback responses to mechanical perturbations: a primer on what we know now and some suggestions on what we should find out next

A review of the neurobiomechanical processes underlying secure gripping in object manipulation

O'SHEA, H. and S. J. Redmond. A review of the neurobiomechanical processes underlying secure gripping in object manipulation. NEUROSCI BIOBEHAV REV 286-300, 2021. Humans display skilful control over the objects they manipulate, so much so that biomimetic systems have yet to emulate this remarkable behaviour. Two key control processes are assumed to facilitate such dexterity: predictive cognitive-motor processes that guide manipulation procedures by anticipating action outcomes; and reactive sensorimotor processes that provide important error-based information for movement adaptation. Notwithstanding increased interdisciplinary research interest in object manipulation behaviour, the complexity of the perceptual-sensorimotor-cognitive processes involved and the theoretical divide regarding the fundamentality of control mean that the essential mechanisms underlying manipulative action remain undetermined. In this paper, following a detailed discussion of the theoretical and empirical bases for understanding human dexterous movement, we emphasise the role of tactile-related sensory events in secure object handling, and consider the contribution of certain biophysical and biomechanical phenomena. We aim to provide an integrated account of the current state-of-art in skilled human-object interaction that bridges the literature in neuroscience, cognitive psychology, and biophysics. We also propose novel directions for future research exploration in this area.

Shared internal models for feedforward and feedback control of arm dynamics in non-human primates

Previous work has shown that humans account for and learn novel properties or the arm's dynamics, and that such learning causes changes in both the predictive (i.e., feedforward) control of reaching and reflex (i.e., feedback) responses to mechanical perturbations. Here we show that similar observations hold in old-world monkeys (Macaca fascicularis). Two monkeys were trained to use an exoskeleton to perform a single-joint elbow reaching and to respond to mechanical perturbations that created pure elbow motion. Both of these tasks engaged robust shoulder muscle activity as required to account for the torques that typically arise at the shoulder when the forearm rotates around the elbow joint (i.e., intersegmental dynamics). We altered these intersegmental arm dynamics by having the monkeys generate the same elbow movements with the shoulder joint either free to rotate, as normal, or fixed by the robotic manipulandum, which eliminates the shoulder torques caused by forearm rotation. After fixing the shoulder joint, we found a systematic reduction in shoulder muscle activity. In addition, after releasing the shoulder joint again, we found evidence of kinematic aftereffects (i.e., reach errors) in the direction predicted if failing to compensate for normal arm dynamics. We also tested whether such learning transfers to feedback responses evoked by mechanical perturbations and found a reduction in shoulder feedback responses, as appropriate for these altered arm intersegmental dynamics. Demonstrating this learning and transfer in non-human primates will allow the investigation of the neural mechanisms involved in feedforward and feedback control of the arm's dynamics.

Effects of aging on rapid grip force responses during bimanual manipulation of an active object

Rapid grip force responses to unexpected pulling loads on the fingertips are deteriorated in older adults due to, in part, age-related declines in somatosensory function. Such reports are limited to one-hand conditions despite the higher frequency of using two hands together in daily living activities of older adults. Unexpected perturbations during bimanual movements elicit goal-oriented and cortically-meditated bilateral rapid motor responses. Since aging is associated with declined somatosensory and cognitive functions, we hypothesized that bilateral rapid motor responses differ between young and older adults, such that older adults exert stronger grip forces following perturbation and the unperturbed hand is more involved in stabilizing the object in older adults. We tested our hypothesis by comparing the rapid grip force responses of both hands in young and older adults. A total of 13 right-handed young individuals (24.2 ± 4.0 years old, 5 men) and 13 right-handed older individuals (68.7 ± 7.1 years old, 5 men) were recruited. Tactile detection threshold, fingertip friction, and the rapid grip force responses of both hands triggered by unpredicted pulling loads during grip-lift movements were assessed. Older adults had higher tactile detection thresholds and lower fingertip friction compared to young adults. Regardless of age, rapid motor responses were found in both the perturbed (right) hand and the indirectly perturbed (left) hand at 73 ms and 135 ms after the perturbation, respectively, while magnitudes of the responses depended on perturbation magnitudes. Higher values in maximum grip force and maximum grip force rate were found in older adults as compared to young adults. In older adults, the indirectly perturbed (left) hand was more involved in stabilizing the object as compared to young healthy adults. The current study suggests that age-related changes in the peripheral and central nervous systems contribute to the greater involvement of the indirectly perturbed hand in older adults.

Learning New Feedforward Motor Commands Based on Feedback Responses

Learning a new motor task modifies feedforward (i.e., voluntary) motor commands and such learning also changes the sensitivity of feedback responses (i.e., reflexes) to mechanical perturbations [1-9]. For example, after people learn to generate straight reaching movements in the presence of an external force field or learn to reduce shoulder muscle activity when generating pure elbow movements with shoulder fixation, evoked stretch reflex responses to mechanical perturbations reflect the learning expressed during self-initiated reaching. Such a transfer from feedforward motor commands to feedback responses is thought to take place because of shared neural circuits at the level of the spinal cord, brainstem, and cerebral cortex [10-13]. The presence of shared neural resources also predicts the transfer from feedback responses to feedforward motor commands. Little is known about such a transfer presumably because it is relatively hard to elicit learning in reflexes without engaging associated voluntary responses following mechanical perturbations. Here, we demonstrate such transfer by leveraging two approaches to elicit stretch reflexes while minimizing engagement of voluntary motor responses in the learning process: applying very short mechanical perturbations [14-19] and instructing participants to not respond to them [20-26]. Taken together, our work shows that transfer between feedforward and feedback control is bidirectional, furthering the notion that these processes share common neural circuits that underlie motor learning and transfer.

Long-latency Responses to a Mechanical Perturbation of the Index Finger Have a Spinal Component

In an uncertain external environment, the motor system may need to respond rapidly to an unexpected stimulus. Limb displacement causes muscle stretch; the corrective response has multiple activity bursts, which are suggested to originate from different parts of the neuraxis. The earliest response is so fast, it can only be produced by spinal circuits; this is followed by slower components thought to arise from primary motor cortex (M1) and other supraspinal areas.

In an uncertain external environment, the motor system may need to respond rapidly to an unexpected stimulus. Limb displacement causes muscle stretch; the corrective response has multiple activity bursts, which are suggested to originate from different parts of the neuraxis. The earliest response is so fast, it can only be produced by spinal circuits; this is followed by slower components thought to arise from primary motor cortex (M1) and other supraspinal areas. Spinal cord (SC) contributions to the slower components are rarely considered. To address this, we recorded neural activity in M1 and the cervical SC during a visuomotor tracking task, in which 2 female macaque monkeys moved their index finger against a resisting motor to track an on-screen target. Following the behavioral trial, an increase in motor torque rapidly returned the finger to its starting position (lever velocity >200°/s). Many cells responded to this passive mechanical perturbation (M1: 148 of 211 cells, 70%; SC: 67 of 119 cells, 56%). The neural onset latency was faster for SC compared with M1 cells (21.7 ± 11.2 ms vs 25.5 ± 10.7 ms, respectively, mean ± SD). Using spike-triggered averaging, some cells in both regions were identified as likely premotor cells, with monosynaptic connections to motoneurons. Response latencies for these cells were compatible with a contribution to the muscle responses following the perturbation. Comparable fractions of responding neurons in both areas were active up to 100 ms after the perturbation, suggesting that both SC circuits and supraspinal centers could contribute to later response components.

SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Following a limb perturbation, multiple reflexes help to restore limb position. Given conduction delays, the earliest part of these reflexes can only arise from spinal circuits. By contrast, long-latency reflex components are typically assumed to originate from supraspinal centers. We recorded from both spinal and motor cortical cells in monkeys responding to index finger perturbations. Many spinal interneurons, including those identified as projecting to motoneurons, responded to the perturbation; the timing of responses was compatible with a contribution to both short- and long-latency reflexes. We conclude that spinal circuits also contribute to long-latency reflexes in distal and forearm muscles, alongside supraspinal regions, such as the motor cortex and brainstem.

The effect of salient stimuli on neural oscillations, isometric force, and their coupling

Survival in a suddenly-changing environment requires animals not only to detect salient stimuli, but also to promptly respond to them by initiating or revising ongoing motor processes. We recently discovered that the large vertex brain potentials elicited by sudden supramodal stimuli are strongly coupled with a multiphasic modulation of isometric force, a phenomenon that we named cortico-muscular resonance (CMR). Here, we extend our investigation of the CMR to the time-frequency domain. We show that (i) both somatosensory and auditory stimuli evoke a number of phase-locked and non-phase-locked modulations of EEG spectral power. Remarkably, (ii) some of these phase-locked and non-phase-locked modulations are also present in the Force spectral power. Finally, (iii) EEG and Force time-frequency responses are correlated in two distinct regions of the power spectrum. An early, low-frequency region (∼4 Hz) reflects the previously-described coupling between the phase-locked EEG vertex potential and force modulations. A late, higher-frequency region (beta-band, ∼20 Hz) reflects a second coupling between the non-phase-locked increase of power observed in both EEG and Force. In both time-frequency regions, coupling was maximal over the sensorimotor cortex contralateral to the hand exerting the force, suggesting an effect of the stimuli on the tonic corticospinal drive. Thus, stimulus-induced CMR occurs across at least two different types of cortical activities, whose functional significance in relation to the motor system should be investigated further. We propose that these different types of corticomuscular coupling are important to alter motor behaviour in response to salient environmental events.

Feedforward and Feedback Control Share an Internal Model of the Arm's Dynamics

Recent work has shown that, when countering external forces, the nervous system adjusts not only predictive (i.e., feedforward) control of reaching but also reflex (i.e., feedback) responses to mechanical perturbations. Here we show that altering the physical properties of the arm (i.e., intersegmental dynamics) causes the nervous system to adjust feedforward control and that this learning transfers to feedback responses even though the latter were never directly trained. Forty-five human participants (30 females) performed a single-joint elbow reaching task and countered mechanical perturbations that created pure elbow motion. In our first experiment, we altered intersegmental dynamics by asking participants to generate pure elbow movements when the shoulder joint was either free to rotate or locked by the robotic manipulandum. With the shoulder unlocked, we found robust activation of shoulder flexor muscles for pure elbow flexion trials, as required to counter the interaction torques that arise at the shoulder because of forearm rotation. After locking the shoulder joint, which cancels these interaction torques, we found a substantial reduction in shoulder muscle activity over many trials. In our second experiment, we tested whether such learning transfers to feedback control. Mechanical perturbations applied to the arm with the shoulder unlocked revealed that feedback responses also account for intersegmental dynamics. After locking the shoulder joint, we found a substantial reduction in shoulder feedback responses, as appropriate for the altered intersegmental dynamics. Our work suggests that feedforward and feedback control share an internal model of the arm's dynamics.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Here we show that altering the physical properties of the arm causes people to learn new motor commands and that this learning transfers to their reflex responses to unexpected mechanical perturbations, even though the reflex responses were never directly trained. Our results suggest that feedforward motor commands and reflex responses share an internal model of the arm's dynamics.

Muscle spindle thixotropy affects force perception through afferent-induced facilitation of the motor pathways as revealed by the Kohnstamm effect

This study was designed to explore the effects of intrafusal thixotropy, a property affecting muscle spindle sensitivity, on the sense of force. For this purpose, psychophysical measurements of force perception were performed using an isometric force matching paradigm of elbow flexors consisting of matching different force magnitudes (5, 10 and 20% of subjects' maximal voluntary force). We investigated participants' capacity to match these forces after their indicator arm had undergone voluntary isometric conditioning contractions known to alter spindle thixotropy, i.e., contractions performed at long ('hold long') or short muscle lengths ('hold short'). In parallel, their reference arm was conditioned at the intermediate muscle length ('hold-test') at which the matchings were performed. The thixotropy hypothesis predicts that estimation errors should only be observed at low force levels (up to 10% of the maximal voluntary force) with overestimation of the forces produced following 'hold short' conditioning and underestimation following 'hold long' conditioning. We found the complete opposite, especially following 'hold-short' conditioning where subjects underestimated the force they generated with similar relative error magnitudes across force levels. In a second experiment, we tested the hypothesis that estimation errors depended on the degree of afferent-induced facilitation using the Kohnstamm phenomenon as a probe of motor pathway excitability. Because the stronger post-effects were observed following 'hold-short' conditioning, it appears that the conditioning-induced excitation of spindle afferents leads to force misjudgments by introducing a decoupling between the central effort and the cortical motor outputs.

Corticospinal gating during action preparation and movement in the primate motor cortex

During everyday actions there is a need to be able to withhold movements until the most appropriate time. This motor inhibition is likely to rely on multiple cortical and subcortical areas, but the primary motor cortex (M1) is a critical component of this process. However, the mechanisms behind this inhibition are unclear, particularly the role of the corticospinal system, which is most often associated with driving muscles and movement. To address this, recordings were made from identified corticospinal (PTN, n = 94) and corticomotoneuronal (CM, n = 16) cells from M1 during an instructed delay reach-to-grasp task. The task involved the animals withholding action for ~2 s until a GO cue, after which they were allowed to reach and perform the task for a food reward. Analysis of the firing of cells in M1 during the delay period revealed that, as a population, non-CM PTNs showed significant suppression in their activity during the cue and instructed delay periods, while CM cells instead showed a facilitation during the preparatory delay. Analysis of cell activity during movement also revealed that a substantial minority of PTNs (27%) showed suppressed activity during movement, a response pattern more suited to cells involved in withholding rather than driving movement. These results demonstrate the potential contributions of the M1 corticospinal system to withholding of actions and highlight that suppression of activity in M1 during movement preparation is not evenly distributed across different neural populations.

NEW & NOTEWORTHY Recordings were made from identified corticospinal (PTN) and corticomotoneuronal (CM) cells during an instructed delay task. Activity of PTNs as a population was suppressed during the delay, in contrast to CM cells, which were facilitated. A minority of PTNs showed a rate profile that might be expected from inhibitory cells and could suggest that they play an active role in action suppression, most likely through downstream inhibitory circuits.

The Role of Associative Cortices and Hippocampus during Movement Perturbations

Although motor control has been extensively studied, most research involving neural recordings has focused on primary motor cortex, pre-motor cortex, supplementary motor area, and cerebellum. These regions are involved during normal movements, however, associative cortices and hippocampus are also likely involved during perturbed movements as one must detect the unexpected disturbance, inhibit the previous motor plan, and create a new plan to compensate. Minimal data is available on these brain regions during such “robust” movements. Here, epileptic patients implanted with intracerebral electrodes performed reaching movements while experiencing occasional unexpected force perturbations allowing study of the fronto-parietal, limbic and hippocampal network at unprecedented high spatial, and temporal scales. Areas including orbitofrontal cortex (OFC) and hippocampus showed increased activation during perturbed trials. These results, coupled with a visual novelty control task, suggest the hippocampal MTL-P300 novelty response is modality independent, and that the OFC is involved in modifying motor plans during robust movement.

Human Spinal Motor Control

Human studies in the past three decades have provided us with an emerging understanding of how cortical and spinal networks collaborate to ensure the vast repertoire of human behaviors. Humans have direct cortical connections to spinal motoneurons, which bypass spinal interneurons and exert a direct (willful) muscle control with the aid of a context-dependent integration of somatosensory and visual information at cortical level. However, spinal networks also play an important role. Sensory feedback through spinal circuitries is integrated with central motor commands and contributes importantly to the muscle activity underlying voluntary movements. Regulation of spinal interneurons is used to switch between motor states such as locomotion (reciprocal innervation) and stance (coactivation pattern). Cortical regulation of presynaptic inhibition of sensory afferents may focus the central motor command by opening or closing sensory feedback pathways. In the future, human studies of spinal motor control, in close collaboration with animal studies on the molecular biology of the spinal cord, will continue to document the neural basis for human behavior.

Goal-dependent modulation of the long-latency stretch response at the shoulder, elbow, and wrist

Many studies have demonstrated that muscle activity 50-100 ms after a mechanical perturbation (i.e., the long-latency stretch response) can be modulated in a manner that reflects voluntary motor control. These previous studies typically assessed modulation of the long-latency stretch response from individual muscles rather than how this response is concurrently modulated across multiple muscles. Here we investigated such concurrent modulation by having participants execute goal-directed reaches to visual targets after mechanical perturbations of the shoulder, elbow, or wrist while measuring activity from six muscles that articulate these joints. We found that shoulder, elbow, and wrist muscles displayed goal-dependent modulation of the long-latency stretch response, that the relative magnitude of participants' goal-dependent activity was similar across muscles, that the temporal onset of goal-dependent muscle activity was not reliably different across the three joints, and that shoulder muscles displayed goal-dependent activity appropriate for counteracting intersegmental dynamics. We also observed that the long-latency stretch response of wrist muscles displayed goal-dependent modulation after elbow perturbations and that the long-latency stretch response of elbow muscles displayed goal-dependent modulation after wrist perturbations. This pattern likely arises because motion at either joint could bring the hand to the visual target and suggests that the nervous system rapidly exploits such simple kinematic redundancy when processing sensory feedback to support goal-directed actions.