Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Journal of Physiology logoLink to The Journal of Physiology
. 1974 Dec;243(2):309–320. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1974.sp010755

Modification of the postural response of the normal dog by blindfolding

Richard E Talbott
PMCID: PMC1330710  PMID: 4449067

Abstract

1. Normal dogs were trained to stand quietly upon a movable platform. The animals' postural adjustments in response to sinusoidal motion of the platform were assessed in both the normal and the blindfolded condition. The induced postural adjustments were described by the Fourier coefficients for the fundamental of the input together with the coefficients which were integral multiples of the fundamental.

2. All of the output variables, including motion at the hind limb joints and of the body, showed modifications when the dogs were blindfolded. The body motion increased in amplitude, as measured by the fundamental Fourier coefficient, and further lagged the input motion. Motion at the knee and phalangeal joints also increased in amplitude and the timing of these movements shifted from the normal in characteristic patterns for different frequencies of input motion.

3. The modifications of the postural response due to blindfolding were most pronounced at the lower input frequencies: 0·2-1·0 Hz. At 1·4 Hz or above the fundamental coefficients of most of the output measures resembled those of the normal condition. Even at the higher input frequencies, however, the postural response of the blindfolded dog was more distorted than that of the normal dog.

4. It is hypothesized that relatively slow movement of the visual surround provides the dog with information which is essential to normal operations of the postural control system.

Full text

PDF
309

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. BROOKHART J. M., PARMEGGIANI P. L., PETERSEN W. A., STONE S. A. POSTURAL STABILITY IN THE DOG. Am J Physiol. 1965 Jun;208:1047–1057. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1965.208.6.1047. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bizzi E., Kalil R. E., Morasso P., Tagliasco V. Central programming and peripheral feedback during eye-head coordination in monkeys. Bibl Ophthalmol. 1972;82:220–232. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bizzi E., Kalil R. E., Morasso P. Two modes of active eye-head coordination in monkeys. Brain Res. 1972 May 12;40(1):45–48. doi: 10.1016/0006-8993(72)90104-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Brandt T., Dichgans J., Koenig E. Differential effects of central verses peripheral vision on egocentric and exocentric motion perception. Exp Brain Res. 1973 Mar 19;16(5):476–491. doi: 10.1007/BF00234474. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brookhart J. M., Mori S., Reynolds P. J. Postural reactions to two directions of displacement in dogs. Am J Physiol. 1970 Mar;218(3):719–725. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1970.218.3.719. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Brookhart J. M., Talbott R. E. The postural response of normal dogs to sinusoidal displacement. J Physiol. 1974 Dec;243(2):287–307. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1974.sp010754. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fetz E. E., Finocchio D. V. Operant conditioning of specific patterns of neural and muscular activity. Science. 1971 Oct 22;174(4007):431–435. doi: 10.1126/science.174.4007.431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fuchs A. F. Periodic eye tracking in the monkey. J Physiol. 1967 Nov;193(1):161–171. doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.1967.sp008349. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Humphrey D. R., Schmidt E. M., Thompson W. D. Predicting measures of motor performance from multiple cortical spike trains. Science. 1970 Nov 13;170(3959):758–762. doi: 10.1126/science.170.3959.758. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Kapteyn T. S., de Wit G. Posturography as an auxiliary in vestibular investigation. Acta Otolaryngol. 1972 Feb-Mar;73(2):104–111. doi: 10.3109/00016487209138918. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Michael J. A., Jones G. M. Dependence of visual tracking capability upon stimulus predictability. Vision Res. 1966 Dec;6(12):707–716. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(66)90082-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Morasso P., Bizzi E., Dichgans J. Adjustment of saccade characteristics during head movements. Exp Brain Res. 1973 Mar 19;16(5):492–500. doi: 10.1007/BF00234475. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Mori S., Reynolds P. J., Brookhart J. M. Contribution of pedal afferents to postural control in the dog. Am J Physiol. 1970 Mar;218(3):726–734. doi: 10.1152/ajplegacy.1970.218.3.726. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Reynolds P. J., Talbott R. E., Brookhart J. M. Control of postural reactions in the dog: the role of the dorsal column feedback pathway. Brain Res. 1972 May 12;40(1):159–164. doi: 10.1016/0006-8993(72)90122-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. St-Cyr G. J., Fender D. H. Nonlinearities of the human oculomotor system: gain. Vision Res. 1969 Oct;9(10):1235–1246. doi: 10.1016/0042-6989(69)90111-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of Physiology are provided here courtesy of The Physiological Society

RESOURCES