Perceptuo-Motor Interactions during Prehension Movements

Verhagen, Lennart; Dijkerman, H. Chris; Grol, Maud; Toni, Ivan

doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0057-08.2008

Cited by 109 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This hypothesis finds support in recent fMRI experiments in humans, which suggest that the dorsolateral stream may incorporate perceptual information into its sensorimotor transformations, whereas the dorsomedial circuit may support motor planning for prehension on the basis of advance visual information (Grol et al, 2007;Verhagen et al, 2008). These data, together with the present ones, suggest new ways forward for developing computational models of visuomotor control in the context of the wider question of how the brain organizes our visually guided actions in general.…”

Section: The Dorsomedial Parieto-frontal Circuit Is Involved In Graspingsupporting

confidence: 80%

The Dorsomedial Pathway Is Not Just for Reaching: Grasping Neurons in the Medial Parieto-Occipital Cortex of the Macaque Monkey

Fattori¹,

Raos²,

Breveglieri³

et al. 2010

J. Neurosci.

179

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Brain control of prehension is thought to rely on two specific brain circuits: a dorsomedial one (involving the areas of the superior parietal lobule and the dorsal premotor cortex) involved in the transport of the hand toward the object and a dorsolateral one (involving the inferior parietal lobule and the ventral premotor cortex) dealing with the preshaping of the hand according to the features of the object. The present study aimed at testing whether a pivotal component of the dorsomedial pathway (area V6A) is involved also in hand preshaping and grip formation to grasp objects of different shapes.Two macaque monkeys were trained to reach and grasp different objects. For each object, animals used a different grip: whole-hand prehension, finger prehension, hook grip, primitive precision grip, and advanced precision grip. Almost half of 235 neurons recorded from V6A displayed selectivity for a grip or a group of grips. Several experimental controls were used to ensure that neural modulation was attributable to grip only.Thesefindings,inconcertwithpreviousstudiesdemonstratingthatV6Aneuronsaremodulatedbyreachdirectionandwristorientation,that lesion of V6A evokes reaching and grasping deficits, and that dorsal premotor cortex contains both reaching and grasping neurons, indicate that the dorsomedial parieto-frontal circuit may play a central role in all phases of reach-to-grasp action. Our data suggest new directions for the modeling of prehension movements and testable predictions for new brain imaging and neuropsychological experiments.

show abstract

Section: The Dorsomedial Parieto-frontal Circuit Is Involved In Graspingsupporting

confidence: 80%

The Dorsomedial Pathway Is Not Just for Reaching: Grasping Neurons in the Medial Parieto-Occipital Cortex of the Macaque Monkey

Fattori¹,

Raos²,

Breveglieri³

et al. 2010

J. Neurosci.

179

151

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given that binocular advantages have been repeatedly demonstrated for movement execution (increased speed, accuracy and precision) when normal adults are required to grasp objects presented in isolation (e.g., Servos et al 1992;Servos and Goodale 1994;Watt and Bradshaw 2000;Bradshaw and Elliot 2003;Loftus et al 2004;Melmoth and Grant 2006), the likely answer would seem to be 'yes'. This conjecture is supported by the fact that the normal 'automaticity' of obstacle avoidance is contingent on intact dorsal stream-posterior parietal cortical functioning Schindler et al 2004;Rice et al 2006), probably involving areas with privileged access to binocular 3D (e.g., near-space, absolute and dynamic disparity) information useful for hand movement programming and on-line guidance (Quinlan and Culham 2007;Verhagen et al 2008Verhagen et al , 2012Gallivan et al 2009;Srivastava et al 2009;Cottereau et al 2012). …”

Section: [Figure 1 Near Here]mentioning

confidence: 99%

Gaze–grasp coordination in obstacle avoidance: differences between binocular and monocular viewing

Grant

2015

Exp Brain Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Permanent repository link AbstractMost adults can skillfully avoid potential obstacles when acting in everyday cluttered scenes. We examined how gaze and hand movements are normally coordinated for obstacle avoidance and whether these are altered when binocular depth information is unavailable. Visual fixations and hand movement kinematics were simultaneously recorded while 13 right-handed subjects reached-toprecision grasp a cylindrical household object presented alone or with a potential obstacle (wine glass) located to its left (thumb's grasp-side), right or just behind it (both closer to the finger's grasp-side) using binocular or monocular vision. Gaze and hand movement strategies differed significantly by view and obstacle location. With binocular vision, initial fixations were near the target's centre of mass (COM) around the time of hand movement onset, but usually shifted to end just above the thumb's grasp-site at initial object contact, this mainly be made by the thumb, consistent with selecting this digit for guiding the grasp. This strategy was associated with faster binocular hand movements and improved end-point grip precision across all trials than with monocular viewing, during which subjects usually continued to fixate the target closer to its COM despite a similar prevalence of thumb-first contacts. While subjects looked directly at the obstacle at each location on a minority of trials and their overall fixations on the target were somewhat biased towards the grasp-side nearest to it, these gaze behaviours were particularly marked on monocular vision-obstacle behind trials which also commonly ended in finger-first contact. Subjects avoided colliding with the wine glass under both views when on the right (finger-side) of the workspace by producing slower and straighter reaches, with this and the behind obstacle location also resulting in 'safer' (i.e., narrower) peak grip apertures and longer deceleration times than when the goal-object was alone or the obstacle was on its thumb-side. But monocular reach paths were more variable and deceleration times were selectively prolonged on finger-side and behind obstacle trials, with this latter condition further resulting in selectively increased grip closure times and corrections. Binocular vision thus provided added advantages for collision avoidance, known to require intact dorsal cortical stream processing mechanisms, particularly when the target of the grasp and potential obstacle to it were fairly closely separated in depth. Different accounts of the altered monocular gaze behaviour converged on the conclusion that additional perceptual and/or attentional resources are likely engaged compared to when continuous binocular depth information is available. Implications for people lacking binocular stereopsis are briefly considered.

show abstract

“…The temporal derivatives were included in the model as well. Furthermore, six motion parameters (realignment parameters: translation along, and rotation around, the x, y and z axes) and two parameters which correct for global intensity fluctuations (compartment signal parameters: white matter and cerebral spinal fluid; Verhagen, Dijkerman, Grol, & Toni, 2008) were added as regressors. For the second-level random-effects analysis we used the beta-images of the 32 main regressors.…”

Section: Whole-brain Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Syntactic priming and the lexical boost effect during sentence production and sentence comprehension: An fMRI study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBehavioral syntactic priming effects during sentence comprehension are typically observed only if both the syntactic structure and lexical head are repeated. In contrast, during production syntactic priming occurs with structure repetition alone, but the effect is boosted by repetition of the lexical head. We used fMRI to investigate the neuronal correlates of syntactic priming and lexical boost effects during sentence production and comprehension. The critical measure was the magnitude of fMRI adaptation to repetition of sentences in active or passive voice, with or without verb repetition. In conditions with repeated verbs, we observed adaptation to structure repetition in the left IFG and MTG, for active and passive voice. However, in the absence of repeated verbs, adaptation occurred only for passive sentences. None of the fMRI adaptation effects yielded differential effects for production versus comprehension, suggesting that sentence comprehension and production are subserved by the same neuronal infrastructure for syntactic processing.

show abstract

Perceptuo-Motor Interactions during Prehension Movements

Cited by 109 publications

References 70 publications

The Dorsomedial Pathway Is Not Just for Reaching: Grasping Neurons in the Medial Parieto-Occipital Cortex of the Macaque Monkey

The Dorsomedial Pathway Is Not Just for Reaching: Grasping Neurons in the Medial Parieto-Occipital Cortex of the Macaque Monkey

Gaze–grasp coordination in obstacle avoidance: differences between binocular and monocular viewing

Syntactic priming and the lexical boost effect during sentence production and sentence comprehension: An fMRI study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About