4.7 Article

Basal ganglia contribution to the initiation of corrective submovements

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 47, 期 4, 页码 1757-1766

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.04.077

关键词

Online adaptation; Motor-control; fMRI

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [P01 NS044393] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We investigated the neural processes, with a focus on subcortical circuits, which govern corrective submovements in visually targeted action. During event-related fMRI, subjects moved a cursor to capture targets presented at varying movement amplitudes. Movements were performed in a rehearsed null and a novel Viscous (25% random trials) torque field. Movement error feedback was provided after each trial. The viscous field invoked a significantly larger error at the end of the primary movement. Subjects compensated by producing more corrections than they had in the null condition. Corrective submovements were appropriately scaled such that terminal error was similar between the two conditions. Parametric analysis identified two regions where the BOLD signal correlated with the number of submovements per trial: a Cerebellar region similar to the one noted in the task contrast and the contralateral dorsal putamen. A separate parametric analysis identified brain regions where activity correlated with movement amplitude. This identified the same cerebellar region as above, bilateral parietal cortex, and left motor and premotor cortex. Our data indicate that the basal ganglia and cerebellum play complementary roles in regulating ongoing actions when precise updating is required. The basal ganglia have a key role in contextually-based motor decision-making, i.e. for deciding if and when to correct a given movement by initiating corrective submovements, and the cerebellum is more generally involved in amplifying and refining the command signals for movements of different amplitudes. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据