Yury Ivanenko

Dr. Yury Ivanenko

Laboratory of Neuromotor Physiology, IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, 00179 Rome, Italy
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

32Years (1995-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
30 March 2004 in The Journal of Physiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Yury IvanenkoYury Ivanenko
Yury Ivanenko
RPR. E. Poppele
R. E. Poppele
FLFrancesco Lacquaniti
Francesco Lacquaniti
An electromyographic (EMG) activity pattern for individual muscles in the gait cycle exhibits a great deal of intersubject, intermuscle and context‐dependent variability. Here we examined the issue of common underlying patterns by applying factor analysis to the set of EMG records obtained at different walking speeds and gravitational loads. To this end healthy subjects were asked to walk on a treadmill at speeds of 1, 2, 3 and 5kmh−1 as well as when 35–95% of the body weight was supported using a harness. We recorded from 12–16 ipsilateral leg and trunk muscles using both surface and intramuscular recording and determined the average, normalized EMG of each record for 10–15 consecutive step cycles. We identified five basic underlying factors or component waveforms that can account for about 90% of the total waveform variance across different muscles during normal gait. Furthermore, while activation patterns of individual muscles could vary dramatically with speed and gravitational load, both the limb kinematics and the basic EMG components displayed only limited changes. Thus, we found a systematic phase shift of all five factors with speed in the same direction as the shift in the onset of the swing phase. This tendency for the factors to be timed according to the lift‐off event supports the idea that the origin of the gait cycle generation is the propulsion rather than heel strike event. The basic invariance of the factors with walking speed and with body weight unloading implies that a few oscillating circuits drive the active muscles to produce the locomotion kinematics. A flexible and dynamic distribution of these basic components to the muscles may result from various descending and proprioceptive signals that depend on the kinematic and kinetic demands of the movements.

1 June 2006 in Journal of Neurophysiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
GCG. Cappellini
G. Cappellini
Yury IvanenkoYury Ivanenko
Yury Ivanenko
RPR. E. Poppele
R. E. Poppele
FLFrancesco Lacquaniti
Francesco Lacquaniti
Despite distinct differences between walking and running, the two types of human locomotion are likely to be controlled by shared pattern-generating networks. However, the differences between their kinematics and kinetics imply that corresponding muscle activations may also be quite different. We examined the differences between walking and running by recording kinematics and electromyographic (EMG) activity in 32 ipsilateral limb and trunk muscles during human locomotion, and compared the effects of speed (3–12 km/h) and gait. We found that the timing of muscle activation was accounted for by five basic temporal activation components during running as we previously found for walking. Each component was loaded on similar sets of leg muscles in both gaits but generally on different sets of upper trunk and shoulder muscles. The major difference between walking and running was that one temporal component, occurring during stance, was shifted to an earlier phase in the step cycle during running. These muscle activation differences between gaits did not simply depend on locomotion speed as shown by recordings during each gait over the same range of speeds (5–9 km/h). The results are consistent with an organization of locomotion motor programs having two parts, one that organizes muscle activation during swing and another during stance and the transition to swing. The timing shift between walking and running reflects therefore the difference in the relative duration of the stance phase in the two gaits.

18 November 2011 in Science
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
NDNadia Dominici
Nadia Dominici
Yury IvanenkoYury Ivanenko
Yury Ivanenko
GCGermana Cappellini
Germana Cappellini
ADAndrea d'Avella
Andrea d'Avella
VMVito Mondí
Vito Mondí
FLFrancesco Lacquaniti
Francesco Lacquaniti
Mammalian locomotion patterns share common roots.

20 March 2018 in Frontiers in Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Yury IvanenkoYury Ivanenko
Yury Ivanenko
VGVictor S. Gurfinkel
Victor S. Gurfinkel
From ancient Greece to nowadays, research on posture control was guided and shaped by many concepts. Equilibrium control is often considered part of postural control. However, two different levels have become increasingly apparent in the postural control system, one level sets a distribution of tonic muscle activity (“posture”) and the other is assigned to compensate for internal or external perturbations (“equilibrium”). While the two levels are inherently interrelated, both neurophysiological and functional considerations point toward distinct neuromuscular underpinnings. Disturbances of muscle tone may in turn affect movement performance. The unique structure, specialization and properties of skeletal muscles should also be taken into account for understanding important peripheral contributors to postural regulation. Here, we will consider the neuromechanical basis of habitual posture and various concepts that were rather influential in many experimental studies and mathematical models of human posture control.

3 August 2005 in Journal of Neuroscience
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Yury IvanenkoYury Ivanenko
Yury Ivanenko
GCGermana Cappellini
Germana Cappellini
NDNadia Dominici
Nadia Dominici
RPRichard E. Poppele
Richard E. Poppele
FLFrancesco Lacquaniti
Francesco Lacquaniti
Muscle activity occurring during human locomotion can be accounted for by five basic temporal activation patterns in a variety of locomotion conditions. Here, we examined how these activation patterns interact with muscle activity required for a voluntary movement. Subjects produced a voluntary movement during locomotion, and we examined the resulting kinematics, kinetics, and EMG activity in 16-31 ipsilateral limb and trunk muscles during the tasks. There were four voluntary tasks added to overground walking (∼5 km/h) in which subjects kicked a ball, stepped over an obstacle, or reached down and grasped an object on the floor (weight support on either the right or the left foot). Statistical analyses of EMG waveforms showed that the five basic locomotion patterns were invariantly present in each task, although they could be differently weighted across muscles, suggesting a characteristic locomotion timing of muscle activations. We also observed a separate activation that was timed to the voluntary task. The coordination of locomotion with the voluntary task was accomplished by combining activation timings that were associated separately with the voluntary task and locomotion. Activation associated with the voluntary tasks was either synchronous with the timing for locomotion or had additional activations not represented in the basic locomotion timing. We propose that this superposition of an invariant locomotion timing pattern with a voluntary activation timing may be consistent with the proposal suggesting that compound movements are produced through a superposition of motor programs.

11 April 2012 in The Journal of Physiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FLFrancesco Lacquaniti
Francesco Lacquaniti
Yury IvanenkoYury Ivanenko
Yury Ivanenko
MZMyrka Zago
Myrka Zago