Cerebellar damage diminishes long-latency responses to multijoint perturbations
Open accessAbstract
Damage to the cerebellum can cause significant problems in the coordination of voluntary arm movements. One prominent idea is that incoordination stems from an inability to predictively account for the complex mechanical interactions between the arm's several joints. Motivated by growing evidence that corrective feedback control shares important capabilities and neural substrates with feedforward control, we asked whether cerebellar damage impacts feedback stabilization of the multijoint arm appropriate for the arm's intersegmental dynamics. Specifically, we tested whether cerebellar dysfunction impacts the ability of posterior deltoid to incorporate elbow motion in its long-latency response (R2 = 45–75 ms and R3 = 75–100 ms after perturbation) to an unexpected torque perturbation. Healthy and cerebellar-damaged subjects were exposed to a selected pattern of shoulder-elbow displacements to probe the response pattern from this shoulder extensor muscle. The healthy elderly subjects expressed a long-latency response linked to both shoulder and elbow motion, including an increase/decrease in shoulder extensor activity with elbow flexion/extension. Critically, cerebellar-damaged subjects displayed the normal pattern of activity in the R3 period indicating an intact ability to rapidly integrate multijoint motion appropriate to the arm's intersegmental dynamics. However, cerebellar-damaged subjects had a lower magnitude of activity that was specific to the long-latency period (both R2 and R3) and a slightly delayed onset of multijoint sensitivity. Taken together, our results suggest that the basic motor pattern of the long-latency response is housed outside the cerebellum and is scaled by processes within the cerebellum.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Cerebellar patients can show a reduced feedback gain in situations where responses are driven by proprioception more than vision.
“cerebellar patients can also show a reduced feedback gain in situations where responses are driven by proprioception more than vision (Kurtzer et al., 2013).”
From The Forward Model: A Unifying Theory for the Role of the Cerebellum in Motor Control and Sense of Agency (2021) · cites this paper as Kurtzer et al., 2013
Cites
Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination
Todorov, E., & Jordan, M. I. (2002) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn963 · Cited by 3,081 · see citing works
The central nervous system stabilizes unstable dynamics by learning optimal impedance
Burdet, E., Osu, R., Franklin, D. W., Milner, T. E., & Kawato, M. (2001) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35106566 · Cited by 1,097 · see citing works
Force field effects on cerebellar Purkinje cell discharge with implications for internal models
Pasalar, S., Roitman, A. V., Durfee, W. K., & Ebner, T. J. (2006) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1783 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Influence of vision on upper limb reaching movements in patients with cerebellar ataxia
Day, B. (1998) · Brain · doi:10.1093/brain/121.2.357 · Cited by 143 · see citing works
What features of limb movements are encoded in the discharge of cerebellar neurons?
Ebner, T. J., Hewitt, A. L., & Popa, L. S. (2011) · The Cerebellum · doi:10.1007/s12311-010-0243-0 · Cited by 88 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Consensus Paper: The Role of the Cerebellum in Perceptual Processes
Baumann, O., Borra, R. J., Bower, J. M., Cullen, K. E., Habas, C., Ivry, R. B., Leggio, M., Mattingley, J. B., Molinari, M., Moulton, E. A., et al. (2015) · The Cerebellum · doi:10.1007/s12311-014-0627-7 · Cited by 462 · see citing works
Welniarz, Q., Worbe, Y., & Gallea, C. (2021) · Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnsys.2021.644059 · Cited by 125 · see citing works
- Authors
- Kurtzer, I., Trautman, P., Rasquinha, R. J., Bhanpuri, N. H., Scott, S. H., & Bastian, A. J.
- Affiliations
- New York Institute of Technology (US)
- Kennedy Krieger Institute (US)
- Queen's University (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Kurtzer, Isaac
- Venue
- Journal of Neurophysiology
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 2013-04-15
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 2228-2241
- ISSN
- 0022-3077 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-1598
- PMC
- PMC3628027
- OpenAlex
- W1978148516
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Journal of Neurophysiology (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research
- Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (24657050, 20247005)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD040289)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
- Keywords
- cerebellar lesions, long-latency responses, arm coordination, posterior deltoid, feedforward control, motor prediction
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Aged, Cerebellar Ataxia, Cerebellum, Humans, Joints, Middle Aged, Motion, Movement, Reaction Time, Case-Control Studies, Muscle, Skeletal, Torque, Feedback, Physiological, Upper Extremity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review