The role of anticipatory postural adjustments in interlimb coordination of coupled arm movements in the parasagittal plane : II. Postural activities and coupling coordination during cyclic flexion–extension arm movements, ISO- and ANTI-directionally coupled

When coupling cyclic adduction–abduction movements of the arms in the transverse (horizontal) plane, isodirectional (ISO) coupling is less stable than antidirectional (ANTI) coupling. We proposed that such deficiency stems from the disturbing action that anticipatory postural adjustments exert on ISO coupling. To ascertain if postural adjustments differentiate ISO versus ANTI coupling coordination in other types of cyclic arm movements, we examined flexion–extension oscillations in the parasagittal plane. Oscillations of the right arm alone elicited cyclic Postural Adjustments (PAs) in the left Anterior Deltoid and Posterior Deltoid, which replicated the excitation–inhibition pattern of the prime movers right Anterior Deltoid, right Posterior Deltoid. Cyclic PAs also developed symmetrically in Erector Spinae (rES and lES) and in phase opposition in Ischiocruralis (rIC and lIC), so as to discharge to the ground both an anteroposterior force, Fy, and a moment about the vertical axis, Tz. Oscillations of both arms in ISO coupling induced symmetric PAs in both ES and IC muscles, thus generating a large Fy but no Tz. In ANTI coupling, PAs in rES and lES remained symmetric but smaller in size, while PAs in rIC and lIC were large and opposite in phase, resulting in a large Tz and small Fy. Altogether, PAs would thus favour ISO and hamper ANTI parasagittal movements because (1) in the motor pathways to the prime movers of either arm, a convergence would occur between the voluntary commands and the commands for PAs linked to the movement of the other arm, the two commands having the same sign (excitatory or inhibitory) during ISO and an opposite sign during ANTI; (2) the postural effort of trunk and leg muscles would be higher for generating Tz in ANTI than Fy in ISO. These predictions fit with the finding that coupling stability was lower in ANTI than in ISO, i.e., opposite to horizontal movements. In conclusion, in both parasagittal and horizontal arm movements, the less coordinated coupling mode was the one constrained by postural adjustments through the two above mechanisms.