4.7 Article

Daily update of motor predictions by physical activity

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 5, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep17933

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NSF BCS [1031899]
  2. ANR MOTION [ANR-14-CE30-0007-01]
  3. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie
  4. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci [1031899] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  5. Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) [ANR-14-CE30-0007] Funding Source: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Motor prediction, i.e., the ability to predict the sensory consequences of motor commands, is critical for adapted motor behavior. Like speed or force, the accuracy of motor prediction varies in a 24-hour basis. Although the prevailing view is that basic biological markers regulate this circadian modulation, behavioral factors such as physical activity, itself modulated by the alternation of night and day, can also regulate motor prediction. Here, we propose that physical activity updates motor prediction on a daily basis. We tested our hypothesis by up-and down-regulating physical activity via arm-immobilization and high-intensity training, respectively. Motor prediction was assessed by measuring the timing differences between actual and mental arm movements. Results show that although mental movement time was modulated during the day when the arm was unconstrained, it remained constant when the arm was immobilized. Additionally, increase of physical activity, via release from immobilization or intense bout of training, significantly reduced mental movement time. Finally, mental and actual times were similar in the afternoon in the unconstrained condition, indicating that predicted and actual movements match after sufficient amount of physical activity. Our study supports the view that physical activity calibrates motor predictions on a daily basis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available