Stereotypical reaching movements of the octopus involve both bend propagation and arm elongation

The bend propagation involved in the stereotypical reaching movement of the octopus arm has been extensively studied. While these studies have analyzed the kinematics of bend propagation along the arm during its extension, possible length changes have been ignored. Here, the elongation profiles of the reaching movements of Octopus vulgaris were assessed using three-dimensional reconstructions. The analysis revealed that, in addition to bend propagation, arm extension movements involve elongation of the proximal part of the arm, i.e., the section from the base of the arm to the propagating bend. The elongations are quite substantial and highly variable, ranging from an average strain along the arm of -0.12 (i.e. shortening) up to 1.8 at the end of the movement (0.57 ± 0.41, n = 64 movements, four animals). Less variability was discovered in an additional set of experiments on reaching movements (0.64 ± 0.28, n = 30 movements, two animals), where target and octopus positions were kept more stationary. Visual observation and subsequent kinematic analysis suggest that the reaching movements can be broadly segregated into two groups. The first group involves bend propagation beginning at the base of the arm and propagating towards the arm tip. In the second, the bend is formed or present more distally and reaching is achieved mainly by elongation and straightening of the segment proximal to the bend. Only in the second type of movements is elongation significantly positively correlated with the distance of the bend from the target. We suggest that reaching towards a target is generated by a combination of both propagation of a bend along the arm and arm elongation. These two motor primitives may be combined to create a broad spectrum of reaching movements. The dynamical model, which recapitulates the biomechanics of the octopus muscular hydrostatic arm, suggests that achieving the observed elongation requires an extremely low ratio of longitudinal to transverse muscle force (<0.0016 for an average strain along the arm of around 0.5). This was not observed and moreover such extremely low value does not seem to be physiologically possible. Hence the assumptions made in applying the dynamic model to behaviors such as static arm stiffening that leads to arm extension through bend propagation and the patterns of activation used to simulate such behaviors should be modified to account for movements combining bend propagation and arm elongation.