Intrinsic somatosensory feedback supports motor control and learning to operate artificial body parts

Objective Considerable resources are being invested to enhance the control and usability of artificial limbs through the delivery of unnatural forms of somatosensory feedback. Here, we investigated whether intrinsic somatosensory information from the body part(s) remotely controlling an artificial limb can be leveraged by the motor system to support control and skill learning. Approach In a placebo-controlled design, we used local anaesthetic to attenuate somatosensory inputs to the big toes while participants learned to operate through pressure sensors a toe-controlled and hand-worn robotic extra finger. Motor learning outcomes were compared against a control group who received sham anaesthetic and quantified in three different task scenarios: while operating in isolation from, in synchronous coordination, and collaboration with, the biological fingers. Main results Both groups were able to learn to operate the robotic extra finger, presumably due to abundance of visual feedback and other relevant sensory cues. Importantly, the availability of displaced somatosensory cues from the distal bodily controllers facilitated the acquisition of isolated robotic finger movements, the retention and transfer of synchronous hand-robot coordination skills, and performance under cognitive load. Motor performance was not impaired by toes anaesthesia when tasks involved close collaboration with the biological fingers, indicating that the motor system can close the sensory feedback gap by dynamically integrating task-intrinsic somatosensory signals from multiple, and even distal, body- parts. Significance Together, our findings demonstrate that there are multiple natural avenues to provide intrinsic surrogate somatosensory information to support motor control of an artificial body part, beyond artificial stimulation.

Characterizing the short-latency evoked response to intracortical microstimulation across a multi-electrode array

Objective: Persons with tetraplegia can use brain-machine interfaces to make visually guided reaches with robotic arms. Without somatosensory feedback, these movements will likely be slow and imprecise, like those of persons who retain movement but have lost proprioception. Intracortical microstimulation (ICMS) has promise for providing artificial somatosensory feedback. If ICMS can mimic naturally occurring neural activity, afferent interfaces may be more informative and easier to learn than interfaces that evoke unnaturalistic activity. To develop such biomimetic stimulation patterns, it is important to characterize the responses of neurons to ICMS. Approach: Using a Utah multi-electrode array, we recorded activity evoked by single pulses, and short (~0.2 s) and long (~4 s) trains of ICMS at a wide range of amplitudes and frequencies. As the electrical artifact caused by ICMS typically prevents recording for many milliseconds, we deployed a custom rapid-recovery amplifier with nonlinear gain to limit signal saturation on the stimulated electrode. Across all electrodes after stimulation, we removed the remaining slow return to baseline with acausal high-pass filtering of time-reversed recordings. With these techniques, we could record ~0.7 ms after stimulation offset even on the stimulated electrode. Main results: We recorded likely transsynaptically-evoked activity as early as ~0.7 ms after single pulses of stimulation that was immediately followed by suppressed neural activity lasting 10-150 ms. Instead of this long-lasting inhibition, neurons increased their firing rates for ~100 ms after trains. During long trains, the evoked response on the stimulated electrode decayed rapidly while the response was maintained on non-stimulated channels. Significance: The detailed description of the spatial and temporal response to ICMS can be used to better interpret results from experiments that probe circuit connectivity or function of cortical areas. These results can also contribute to the design of stimulation patterns to improve afferent interfaces for artificial sensory feedback.

Variability is actively regulated in speech

Although movement variability is often attributed to unwanted noise in the motor system, recent work has demonstrated that variability may be actively controlled. To date, research on regulation of motor variability has relied on relatively simple, laboratory-specific reaching tasks. It is not clear how these results translate to complex, well-practiced and real-world tasks. Here, we test how variability is regulated during speech production, a complex, highly over-practiced and natural motor behavior that relies on auditory and somatosensory feedback. Specifically, in a series of four experiments, we assessed the effects of auditory feedback manipulations that modulate perceived speech variability, shifting every production either towards (inward-pushing) or away from (outward-pushing) the center of the distribution for each vowel. Participants exposed to the inward-pushing perturbation (Experiment 1) increased produced variability while the perturbation was applied as well as after it was removed. Unexpectedly, the outward-pushing perturbation (Experiment 2) also increased produced variability during exposure, but variability returned to near baseline levels when the perturbation was removed. Outward-pushing perturbations failed to reduce participants' produced variability both with larger perturbation magnitude (Experiment 3) or after their variability had increased above baseline levels as a result of the inward-pushing perturbation (Experiment 4). Simulations of the applied perturbations using a state space model of motor behavior suggest that the increases in produced variability in response to the two types of perturbations may arise through distinct mechanisms: an increase in controlled variability in response to the inward-pushing perturbation, and an increase in sensitivity to auditory errors in response to the outward-pushing perturbation. Together, these results suggest that motor variability is actively regulated even in complex and well-practiced behaviors, such as speech.

Visual and somatosensory feedback mechanisms of precision manual motor control in autism spectrum disorder

Background Individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) show deficits processing sensory feedback to reactively adjust ongoing motor behaviors. Atypical reliance on visual and somatosensory feedback each have been reported during motor behaviors in ASD suggesting that impairments are not specific to one sensory domain but may instead reflect a deficit in multisensory processing, resulting in reliance on unimodal feedback. The present study tested this hypothesis by examining motor behavior across different visual and somatosensory feedback conditions during a visually guided precision grip force test. Methods Participants with ASD (N = 43) and age-matched typically developing (TD) controls (N = 23), ages 10–20 years, completed a test of precision gripping. They pressed on force transducers with their index finger and thumb while receiving visual feedback on a computer screen in the form of a horizontal bar that moved upwards with increased force. They were instructed to press so that the bar reached the level of a static target bar and then to hold their grip force as steadily as possible. Visual feedback was manipulated by changing the gain of the force bar. Somatosensory feedback was manipulated by applying 80 Hz tendon vibration at the wrist to disrupt the somatosensory percept. Force variability (standard deviation) and irregularity (sample entropy) were examined using multilevel linear models. Results While TD controls showed increased force variability with the tendon vibration on compared to off, individuals with ASD showed similar levels of force variability across tendon vibration conditions. Individuals with ASD showed stronger age-associated reductions in force variability relative to controls across conditions. The ASD group also showed greater age-associated increases in force irregularity relative to controls, especially at higher gain levels and when the tendon vibrator was turned on. Conclusions Our findings that disrupting somatosensory feedback did not contribute to changes in force variability or regularity among individuals with ASD suggests a reduced ability to integrate somatosensory feedback information to guide ongoing precision manual motor behavior. We also document stronger age-associated gains in force control in ASD relative to TD suggesting delayed development of multisensory feedback control of motor behavior.

Correlation Analysis on the Effects of Wearing Compression Socks and Smooth Socks on Running Kinematics among Runners

This study was conducted to determine running kinematics while using compression socks (CS) and smooth socks (SS) among 16 recreational runners. They were required to complete a maximal treadmill test with two different running sock conditions (smooth and compression). All kinematic parameters (ground contact time, heel strike, stride length and swing time) were reported in an average of the four stages of Bruce protocol. Results showed more significant correlations (p<0.05) among the kinematic variables in the compression socks condition as compared to the smooth socks. In conclusion, wearing compression socks improves movement kinematics while running may be due to the enriched somatosensory information received by the foot. Keywords: Running; Compression socks; Movement kinematics; Somatosensory feedback eISSN: 2398-4287© 2021. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians/Africans/Arabians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21834/ebpj.v6iSI4.2915

Inhibition and Facilitation of the Spinal Locomotor Central Pattern Generator and Reflex Circuits by Somatosensory Feedback From the Lumbar and Perineal Regions After Spinal Cord Injury

Somatosensory feedback from peripheral receptors dynamically interacts with networks located in the spinal cord and brain to control mammalian locomotion. Although somatosensory feedback from the limbs plays a major role in regulating locomotor output, those from other regions, such as lumbar and perineal areas also shape locomotor activity. In mammals with a complete spinal cord injury, inputs from the lumbar region powerfully inhibit hindlimb locomotion, while those from the perineal region facilitate it. Our recent work in cats with a complete spinal cord injury shows that they also have opposite effects on cutaneous reflexes from the foot. Lumbar inputs increase the gain of reflexes while those from the perineal region decrease it. The purpose of this review is to discuss how somatosensory feedback from the lumbar and perineal regions modulate the spinal locomotor central pattern generator and reflex circuits after spinal cord injury and the possible mechanisms involved. We also discuss how spinal cord injury can lead to a loss of functional specificity through the abnormal activation of functions by somatosensory feedback, such as the concurrent activation of locomotion and micturition. Lastly, we discuss the potential functions of somatosensory feedback from the lumbar and perineal regions and their potential for promoting motor recovery after spinal cord injury.

Intact Correction for Self-Produced Vowel Formant Variability in Individuals With Cerebellar Ataxia Regardless of Auditory Feedback Availability

Purpose Individuals with cerebellar ataxia (CA) caused by cerebellar degeneration exhibit larger reactive compensatory responses to unexpected auditory feedback perturbations than neurobiologically typical speakers, suggesting they may rely more on feedback control during speech. We test this hypothesis by examining variability in unaltered speech. Previous studies of typical speakers have demonstrated a reduction in formant variability (centering) observed during the initial phase of vowel production from vowel onset to vowel midpoint. Centering is hypothesized to reflect feedback-based corrections for self-produced variability and thus may provide a behavioral assay of feedback control in unperturbed speech in the same manner as the compensatory response does for feedback perturbations. Method To comprehensively compare centering in individuals with CA and controls, we examine centering in two vowels (/i/ and /ɛ/) under two contexts (isolated words and connected speech). As a control, we examine speech produced both with and without noise to mask auditory feedback. Results Individuals with CA do not show increased centering compared to age-matched controls, regardless of vowel, context, or masking. Contrary to previous results in neurobiologically typical speakers, centering was not affected by the presence of masking noise in either group. Conclusions The similar magnitude of centering seen with and without masking noise questions whether centering is driven by auditory feedback. However, if centering is at least partially driven by auditory/somatosensory feedback, these results indicate that the larger compensatory response to altered auditory feedback observed in individuals with CA may not reflect typical motor control processes during normal, unaltered speech production.