Simisola O.

Oludare

Extra Credit Research Paper

Dr. Lisa Chin-Goelz

KN 472: Movement Neuroscience

November 17, 2015

Multi-Sensory Integration During Reaching

In order to perform complicated, non-reflexive, movements successfully, human beings

need to integrate information from multiple sensory systems. However, due to certain

neurological deficits (such as peripheral neuropathy neuropathy) the accuracy of the sensory

information received from one or more modalities may be reduced. In these situations, the

human nervous system needs to re-integrate the sensory inputs in order to account for the loss of

resolution in one (or more) of its sensors. So, how does the nervous system do this? Over, the

past 40 years reaching tasks have been used to study how proprioception and vision are

integrated. Through these studies, sensory realignment and re-weighting have emerged as

mechanisms of sensory integration. Sensory realignment is a strategy by which the relationship

between both sensory inputs is realigned to accommodate for the discrepancy while sensory re-

weighting is a strategy in which the sensory input with the least variance is given more priority.

Evidence has been found for both mechanisms through novel experiments. In some cases, both

strategies present and in others, either is observed. However, no experiment has been done to

determine the relationship between these two strategies. This is important because patients with

sensory misalignment can compensate through either realignment or reweighting if they are

indeed independent processes -- implying different neural circuits. This is the gap which Block

and Bastian aimed to fill in the experiments performed in the study: ‘Sensory weighting and

realignment: independent compensatory processes” (1). The goal of the study was to determine
the relationship between realignment and re-weighting by designing two novel experiments

which will allow them to compute separate variables representing sensory re-weighting and

sensory realignment independently. Both experiments used the reaching paradigm and

determined the relationship between realignment and re-weighting with respect to the visual and

proprioceptive systems.

The first experiment was used to determine whether or not proprioceptive realignment or

re-weighting would occur when visual feedback was used to make vision the correct sensory

input. The second experiment was used to determine whether or not the results of the first

experiment would persist when visual feedback is eliminated, in effect removing the imposition

of a correct sensor. For both experiments, the protocol involved reaching towards a visual target

(V), a proprioceptive target (P) or a combination of both (VP) during a baseline period which

consisted of 28 reaches. This was followed by an adaptation period consisting of 84 reaches in

which the subjects performed the same reaches except that during the V and VP reaches, the V

target was moved 1.67 mm (in both horizontal and vertical directions) from the previous reach.

This allowed the experimenters to determine how the P reaches were being adjusted based on the

shift in the V target. To ensure that subjects were not aware of the shift, the data of subjects who

felt that there was a discrepancy in the V target. The V target was provided by an overhead

projector which displayed a 12 by 12 mm box onto a mirror above the reaching surface and the P

target was the subject’s other hand; the reaching arm was obscured all reach conditions. To

provide feedback during the first experiment, the target box exploded if the subject was within

10 mm of the target. The positions of the reaching arm and the P target were captured via an

Optotrak 3020 digital camera capturing the position of infrared-emitting markers placed on the

index finger of both hands. To quantify realignment and re-weighting, the position of the
reaching arm during each condition (and for each reach) was used to compute: the weight of

vision (wv) and the adjustment of the target arm (Pend point shift). Wv was calculated as the P to VP

distance divided by the sum of the P to VP distance and the V to VP distance; changes in this

value indicate reweighting. Pend point shift was calculated as the mean target arm position of the first

four P reaches subtracted from the mean target arm position of the last four P reaches; changes in

this value reflect realignment. To determine the relationship between the weight of vision and the

adjustment of the target arm, the correlation between wv and Pend point shift was calculated. And to

determine if there was a significant change in the adjustment of the target arm, a Mann-Whitney

U-test was used to compare the first and last four Pend point shifts in the adaptation block. A

significant increase in this value would indicate the realignment strategy. Additionally, the effect

of either realignment or reweighting on the success of the VP reaches was determined by

calculating success during the VP adaptation trial then running a step wise regression with wv

and Pend point shift. Success during the adaptation block was computed as the percentage of the mean

of the reaching arms last four VP reaches divided by 70 mm (the target).

The results of the first experiment showed that 28% of the subjects used a combined

strategy (a shift in the target arm and reweighting of vision), 10% used the subjects the

realignment strategy, and 44% used the reweighting strategy – choosing to rely more on vision.

The remaining 18% used neither of the strategies and performed the reaching task

unsuccessfully. Additionally, for the first experiment, the experimenters were interested in

determining whether or not the realignment strategy was due to either motor adaptation (in the

reaching arm) or pure sensory realignment (in the target arm). To determine this, the

experimenters imposed a secondary experiment on some of the subjects from experiment 1

(n=18) in which the same protocol was performed but the subjects used a cursor to perform the
reaching task instead of their arms. The results from this secondary experiment showed that

motor adaptation played a role in the success of the realignment strategy but the role of sensory

realignment was still significant when the motor adaptation was subtracted. The subjects who

used either strategy or a combination of both were able to be successful. The results of the

second experiment showed that the subjects adjusted the position of their target arm in the

adaptation block which is indicative of a realignment strategy. In order to determine if the

realignment which occurred in the Most importantly, the results of both experiments showed that

the realignment and reweighting strategy used by subjects in both experiments were not

correlated and that the regression analysis was not statistically significant. This allowed the

experimenters to conclude that although these strategies can occur simultaneously, they are

performed by two separate functional pathways. Although, the results revealed a correlation

between reweighting and realignment during the second experiment, the relationship did not last

beyond the baseline block.

The purpose of the experiments conducted in the study by Block and Bastian was to

determine whether or not the realignment and reweighting strategies of adjusting to an imposed

multisensory misalignment are related or independent processes. To achieve this aim, they used a

reaching task to study visual and proprioceptive to study how vision and proprioception are

adjusted. Given the precedent of using this paradigm, the experimenters did not have to reinvent

their outcome measures while using a novel experiment to answer new questions. However, in

order for me to be convinced that the functional measurements made in this study do in fact

reflect distinct neural pathways, I would expect to see an experiment in which neural measures

are made. Although the experiments do not make such measures in a follow study, they do

determine the effect of a temporarily induced lesion via transcranial stimulation (2). This study
allowed the experiments to test the possible neural substrates which they speculated were

responsible for realignment, reweighting or the combination of both. In the experiment, the

angular gyrus near the intraparietal sulcus of the posterior parietal cortex was disrupted by

transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in a group of subjects while the other group received

sham stimulation. The subjects performed the reaching task while a sensory misalignment

similar to the prior experiments was imposed. The results of this study showed that the virtual

lesion imposed onto the angular gyrus eliminated the relationship of realignment and reweighting

which was observed in the control group. By performing this follow up experiment, the authors

were able to isolate the neural substrate which coordinates the relationship between realignment

and reweighting thus identifying a potential clinical population (people with lesions to the

posterior parietal cortex) for whom either realignment or reweighting training needs to be

developed. Together, these two studies provided a complete understanding of multisensory

integration which will be beneficial for design therapies and a framework for future scientists

who want to study more complex, multi joint movements.

References

1. Block HJ and Bastian AJ. Sensory weighting and realignment: independent

compensatory processes. J Neurophysiol. 2011; 106: 59–70.

2. Block HJ, Bastian AJ and Celnik PA. Virtual Lesion of Angular Gyrus Disrupts the

Relationship between Visuoproprioceptive Weighting and Realignment. J Cogn

Neurosci. 2013; 25: 636–648