''A long standing hypothesis in the neuroscience community is that the central nervous system (CNS) generates the muscle activities to accomplish movements by combining a relatively small number of stereotyped patterns of muscle activations, often referred to as" muscle synergies." Different definitions of synergies have been given in the literature. The most well-known are those of synchronous, time-varying and temporal muscle synergies. Each one of them is based on a different mathematical model used to factor some EMG array recordings collected during the execution of variety of motor tasks into a well determined spatial, temporal or spatio-temporal organization. This plurality of definitions and their separate application to complex tasks have so far complicated the comparison and interpretation of the results obtained across studies, and it has always remained unclear why and when one synergistic decomposition should be preferred to anotherone. By using well-understood motor task ssuch as elbow flexions and extensions, we aimed in this study to clarify better what are the motor features characterized by each kind of decomposition and to assess whether, when and why one of them should be preferred to the others. We found that three temporal synergies, each one of the maccounting for specific temporal phases of the movement scould account for the majority of the data variation. Similar performances could be achieved by two synchronous synergies, encoding the agonist-antagonist nature of the two muscles considered, and by two time varying muscle synergies, encoding each one a task-related feature of the elbowmovements, specifically their direction. Our findings support the notion that each EMG decomposition provides a set of well interpretable muscle synergies, identifying reduction of dimensionality in different aspects of the movements. Taken together, our findings suggest that all decompositions are not equivalent and may imply different neurophysiological substrates to be implemented.''