Neural motor control differs between bimanual common-goal vs. bimanual dual-goal tasks
Author(s) -
Wan-wen Liao,
Jill Whitall,
Joseph E. Barton,
Sandy McCombe Waller
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
experimental brain research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.782
H-Index - 172
eISSN - 1432-1106
pISSN - 0014-4819
DOI - 10.1007/s00221-018-5261-z
Subject(s) - transcranial magnetic stimulation , psychology , task (project management) , physical medicine and rehabilitation , motor control , isometric exercise , rehabilitation , neuroscience , stimulation , physical therapy , medicine , management , economics
Coordinating bimanual movements is essential for everyday activities. Two common types of bimanual tasks are common goal, where two arms share a united goal, and dual goal, which involves independent goals for each arm. Here, we examine how the neural control mechanisms differ between these two types of bimanual tasks. Ten non-disabled individuals performed isometric force tasks of the elbow at 10% of their maximal voluntary force in both bimanual common and dual goals as well as unimanual conditions. Using transcranial magnetic stimulation, we concurrently examined the intracortical inhibitory modulation (short-interval intracortical inhibition, SICI) as well as the interlimb coordination strategies utilized between common- vs. dual-goal tasks. Results showed a reduction of SICI in both hemispheres during dual-goal compared to common-goal tasks (dominant hemisphere: P = 0.04, non-dominant hemisphere: P = 0.03) and unimanual tasks (dominant hemisphere: P = 0.001, non-dominant hemisphere: P = 0.001). For the common-goal task, a reduction of SICI was only seen in the dominant hemisphere compared to unimanual tasks (P = 0.03). Behaviorally, two interlimb coordination patterns were identified. For the common-goal task, both arms were organized into a cooperative "give and take" movement pattern. Control of the non-dominant arm affected stabilization of bimanual force (R 2 = 0.74, P = 0.001). In contrast, for the dual-goal task, both arms were coupled together in a positive fashion and neither arm affected stabilization of bimanual force (R 2 = 0.31, P = 0.1). The finding that intracortical inhibition and interlimb coordination patterns were different based on the goal conceptualization of bimanual tasks has implications for future research.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom