Coordination Pattern Adaptability: Energy Cost of Degenerate Behaviors

Abstract

This study investigated behavioral adaptability, which could be defined as a blend between stability and flexibility of the limbs movement and their inter-limb coordination, when individuals received informational constraints. Seven expert breaststroke swimmers performed three 200-m in breaststroke at constant submaximal intensity. Each trial was performed randomly in a different coordination pattern: ‘freely-chosen’, ‘maximal glide’ and ‘minimal glide’. Two underwater and four aerial cameras enabled 3D movement analysis in order to assess elbow and knee angles, elbow-knee pair coordination, intra-cyclic velocity variations of the center of mass, stroke rate and stroke length and inter-limb coordination. The energy cost of locomotion was calculated from gas exchanges and blood lactate concentration. The results showed significantly higher glide, intra-cyclic velocity variations and energy cost under ‘maximal glide’ compared to ‘freely-chosen’ instructional conditions, as well as higher reorganization of limb movement and inter-limb coordination (p<0.05). In the ‘minimal glide’ condition, the swimmers did not show significantly shorter glide and lower energy cost, but they exhibited significantly lower deceleration of the center of mass, as well as modified limb movement and inter-limb coordination (p<0.05). These results highlight that a variety of structural adaptations can functionally satisfy the task-goal.

Pacing the phasing of leg and arm movements in breaststroke swimming to minimize intra-cyclic velocity fluctuations

“…This is consistent with the findings of Seifert et al [26, 27], who observed that the self-selected glide pattern resulted in the lowest IVV . Does this imply that our participants already attained the most efficient leg-arm coordination?…”

“…Furthermore, adding constraints (by instruction), for example about the glide duration, seemed a fruitful way to access the coordination adaptability. Finally, it has been concluded that the self-selected glide pattern showed less IVV and energy costs [26, 27]. Whether acoustic pacing can be used to modify the phase relation between leg and arm movements is still unknown.…”

Skill transfer, expertise and talent development: An ecological dynamics perspective

“…Nor should it always be viewed as error, or a deviation from a putative expert model, which should be constantly corrected in learners (Hastings, Hom, Ellner, Turchin, & Godfray, 1993). Several studies and reviews have provided evidence for the adaptive and functional role of movement and coordination variability in order to satisfy interacting constraints (e.g., Glazier & Davids, 2009;Komar, Chow, Chollet, & Seifert, 2015;Pinder, Davids, & Renshaw, 2012;Rein, Davids, & Button, 2010;Seifert, Komar, Crettenand, & Millet, 2014), providing relevant insights to develop talent in sport. Research has demonstrated how an individual could exploit the system property of degeneracy by switching between various coordinative structures present in their motor repertoire to functionally achieve a specific task goal .…”

“…Coordination variability can be a sign of a performer adapting to the changing constraints of a task and a performance environment (Davids et al, 2003). For instance, Seifert, et al (2014) manipulated task constraints for individuals swimming with the front crawl for 200-m by constraining the glide duration; notably, they investigated behavioural adaptations during performance in a freely-chosen condition of the glide with arms, compared to conditions when maximal and minimal glide durations were specified for performers. Interestingly in a maximal glide duration condition, swimmers were able to increase their leg beat-kicking up to 10 beat kicks (whereas 2, 4 and 6 beat kicks are the most common observed patterns) to functionally compensate for the long glide phase with their arms (Seifert et al, 2014).…”

Neurobiological degeneracy: A key property for functional adaptations of perception and action to constraints

“…one structure can perform many functions) (Mason, 2010;Noppeney et al, 2004;Price and Friston, 2002;Whitacre, 2010). In particular, it is highlighted how some structures that are slightly mobilized under one set of constraints may potentially become much more mobilized under another set of constraints (Komar et al, 2015;Seifert et al, 2014b). The key property of pluri-potentiality invites a re-think of skill acquisition and transfer processes.…”