PubMed1984
The neuromotor processes underlying the control of rapid sequential limb movements were investigated. Subjects learned to pronate and supinate their forearms rapidly to four target locations in a specific spatio-temporal pattern under two movement-time conditions. The response sequence was first performed in a total movement time of 600 ms. Subjects were then told to produce the movement as quickly as possible while ignoring any timing pattern that they had previously learned. Electromyographic (EMG) signals were recorded from the biceps brachii and pronator teres muscles. Kinematic and EMG analyses were performed to investigate the temporal characteristics underlying the two movement-time conditions. When subjects produced the response as quickly as possible, average movement time to perform each reversal movement decreased while average peak velocity increased. Average total movement time was reduced by approximately 100 ms. Although movement time decreased, the proportion of total time to perform each movement of the sequence remained essentially invariant between movement-time conditions. Similar results were obtained for velocity. The time at which peak velocity was achieved occurred earlier in absolute time, although when normalized to the proportion of total movement time, the time to reach peak velocity was also invariant. Thus subjects proportionally compressed the entire movement sequence in time. The EMG analysis demonstrated that total EMG time decreased 89 ms on the average when subjects sped up the movement sequence. Thus average burst durations for both the biceps and pronator teres muscles decreased when movement speed increased. When burst durations were normalized to a proportion of total EMG time, the average proportion of time each muscle was active remained invariant. Therefore, the temporal pattern of activity for the biceps and pronator teres muscles were also proportionally compressed. The present experiment provided additional evidence for the structure of generalized motor programs consisting of invariant and variant features. Movement speed was considered a variant feature, which is specified each time the program is executed. Relative timing, the proportion of total time to produce each segment of the response, was considered to be an invariant feature and inherent in the structure of the motor program. Support for the invariance of relative timing was observed at both the kinematic and neuromuscular levels of analyses. Alternative models (9-11, 24) were found inadequate to account for the invariance of relative timing with the variation in movement time observed in the present experiment.