, Volume 30, Issue 6, pp 420–423 | Cite as

Roles of dynamic and stationary components of a motor command in establishing the equilibrium state at simplest targeted movements

  • A. N. Tal’nov
  • D. A. Vasilenko
  • S. G. Sirenko
  • E. V. Agulova
  • A. I. Kostyukov


We studied in humans interrelations between the kinematic characteristics of targeted movements of the arm and current levels of EMG of the muscles providing these movements; the movements were relatively slow, and the attained joint angle was held for a time. The EMG level was considered a correlate of the level of integral motor commands (efferent activity of the respective motoneuronal pools). Application of low-amplitude non-inertial loadings, directed against the forces developed by one or another muscle group, allowed us to provide realization of targeted movements exclusively by the activity of this muscle group, without Involvement of the antagonists. It was demonstrated that the target equilibrium joint angle is reached synchronously with the dynamic phase of EMG activity, before the latter reaches a stationary level. The structure of the dynamic EMG phase itself is complex; in most cases it is split into several components. The dependence between the joint angle and amplitude of the EMG stationary phase is rather complex and variable, and usually it is difficult to predict the characteristics of this phase based on simple biomechanical considerations. There are proofs that at the performance of the studied movements and maintaining a target position there are some components in the mechanical muscle activity, which are not controlled by the motor commands. Thus, the stationary level of a motor command represents only one of several factors responsible for attaining and maintaining a target equilibrium position. Establishing this position is provided, first of all, by interaction of dynamic components of the motor commands to different muscles. Our results show that the attempts to interpret the processes of control of targeted movements on the basis of modifications of the equilibrium point hypothesis are inadequate; these data are in better compliance with the concept of impulse-temporal control; at their interpretation it is also necessary to take more thoroughly into account nonlinear properties of the muscle reactions.


Joint Angle Target Movement Motor Command Dynamic Phase Flexor Muscle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    A. G. Fel’dman,Central and Reflex Mechanisms Controlling the Movements [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1979).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. A. Wallace, “An Impulse-timing theory for reciprocal control of muscular activity in rapid, discrete movements,”J. Mot. Behav.,13, 144–160 (1981).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. J. Cooke and S. H. Brown, “Movement-related phasic muscle activation. 2. Generation and functional role of the triphasic pattern,”J. Neurophysiol,63, 465–475 (1990).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Hallet and C. D. Marsden, “Ballistic flexion movements of the human thumb,”J. Physiol,294, 33–50 (1979).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Benecke, H. M. Meinck, and B. Conrad, “Rapid goal-directed elbow flexion movements: limitations of speed control system due to neural constrains,”Exp. Brain Res.,59, 470–477 (1985).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    A. N. Tal’nov and A. I. Kostyukov, “Hysteresis after effects in human single-joint voluntary movements,”Neirofiziologiyal Neurophysiology,26, No. 2, 83–90 (1994).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    J. Desmedt and E. Godaux, “Ballistic contractions in fast or slow human muscles: discharge patterns of single motor units,”J. Physiol,285, 185–196 (1978).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    B. E. Mustard and R. S. Lee, “Relationship between EMG patterns and kinematic properties for flexion movements at the human wrist,”J. Exp. Brain Res.,66, No. 2, 2647–256 (1987).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. A. Vasilenko, B. Ya. Pyatigorskii, A. E. Ivanov, and D. D. Vasilenko, “The targeted force steps developed by a human wrist: cyclic components In the motor program,”Neirofiziologiya/Neurophysiology,1(25), No. 6, 455–462 (1993).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    B. C. Abbot and X. M. Aubert, “The force exerted by active striated muscle during and after change of length,”J. Physiol,117. 77–86 (1952).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    A. I. Kostyukov, “Muscle hysteresis and movement control: a theoretical study,”Neuroscience,83, 303–320 (1998).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    E. Bizzi, N. Accornero, W. Chapple, and N. Hogan, “Arm trajectory formation in monkeys,”Exp. Brain Res.,46, 139–143 (1982).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Z. Hasan and R. M. Enoka, “Isometric torque-angle relationship and movement-related activity of human elbow flexors: implications for the equilibrium-point hypotesis,”Exp. Brain Res.,59, 441–450 (1985).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S. V. Adamovich, M. B. Berkinblit, and A. G. Fel’dman, “Principles of motor regulation In human,”Itogi Nauki Tekhniki, Ser. Fizio. Cheloveka Zhivotnykh,43, 1–163 (1990).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. N. Tal’nov
    • 1
  • D. A. Vasilenko
    • 1
  • S. G. Sirenko
    • 1
  • E. V. Agulova
    • 1
  • A. I. Kostyukov
    • 1
  1. 1.Bogomolets Institute of PhysiologyNational Academy of Science of UkraineKyivUkraine

Personalised recommendations