Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28004255›Full record

ArticleBiological cybernetics2017

Robustness, flexibility, and sensitivity in a multifunctional motor control model.

David N Lyttle, Jeffrey P Gill, Kendrick M Shaw, Peter J Thomas, Hillel J Chiel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biological cybernetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Tutorial: using NEURON for neuromechanical simulations.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Sharpened and Mechanically Durable Carbon Fiber Electrode Arrays for Neural Recording.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

David N LyttleDepartment of Mathematics and Biology, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. dnlyttle@gmail.com.
Jeffrey P GillDepartment of Biology, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Kendrick M ShawDepartment of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, 02114, USA.
Peter J ThomasDepartment of Mathematics, Applied Mathematics, and Statistics, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.
Hillel J ChielDepartment of Biology, Neurosciences and Biomedical Engineering, Case Western Reserve University, 10900 Euclid Ave., Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motor systems must adapt to perturbations and changing conditions both within and outside the body. We refer to the ability of a system to maintain performance despite perturbations as "robustness," and the ability of a system to deploy alternative strategies that improve fitness as "flexibility." Different classes of pattern-generating circuits yield dynamics with differential sensitivities to perturbations and parameter variation. Depending on the task and the type of perturbation, high sensitivity can either facilitate or hinder robustness and flexibility. Here we explore the role of multiple coexisting oscillatory modes and sensory feedback in allowing multiphasic motor pattern generation to be both robust and flexible. As a concrete example, we focus on a nominal neuromechanical model of triphasic motor patterns in the feeding apparatus of the marine mollusk Aplysia californica. We find that the model can operate within two distinct oscillatory modes and that the system exhibits bistability between the two. In the "heteroclinic mode," higher sensitivity makes the system more robust to changing mechanical loads, but less robust to internal parameter variations. In the "limit cycle mode," lower sensitivity makes the system more robust to changes in internal parameter values, but less robust to changes in mechanical load. Finally, we show that overall performance on a variable feeding task is improved when the system can flexibly transition between oscillatory modes in response to the changing demands of the task. Thus, our results suggest that the interplay of sensory feedback and multiple oscillatory modes can allow motor systems to be both robust and flexible in a variable environment.

Indexed as

AplysiaFeedback, SensoryMotor ActivityAnimalsAdaptive behaviorAplysiaCentral pattern generatorHeteroclinic channelLimit cycleMultistabilitySensory feedback

Identifiers

PMID28004255
PMCPMC5326633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.