Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Advertisement

Scientific Reports
  • View all journals
  • Search
  • My Account Login
  • Content Explore content
  • About the journal
  • Publish with us
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed
  1. nature
  2. scientific reports
  3. articles
  4. article
Different strategies of bipeds and quadrupeds to maintain postural stability- a comparison of healthy humans and dogs via static posturography
Download PDF
Download PDF
  • Article
  • Open access
  • Published: 09 March 2026

Different strategies of bipeds and quadrupeds to maintain postural stability- a comparison of healthy humans and dogs via static posturography

  • Masoud Aghapour1 na1,
  • Nadja Affenzeller1,2 na1,
  • Christiane Lutonsky1,
  • Christian Peham3 &
  • …
  • Barbara Bockstahler1 

Scientific Reports , Article number:  (2026) Cite this article

  • 614 Accesses

  • 1 Altmetric

  • Metrics details

We are providing an unedited version of this manuscript to give early access to its findings. Before final publication, the manuscript will undergo further editing. Please note there may be errors present which affect the content, and all legal disclaimers apply.

Subjects

  • Animal physiology
  • Biomechanics

Abstract

Postural stability (PS) is the ability to maintain balance through the integration of sensory inputs from the proprioceptive, visual, and vestibular systems. This study compared PS between healthy adult humans and dogs using static posturography and investigated the effect of blindfolding on PS. Twenty-two healthy young adults and twenty-two healthy young pet dogs were assessed using a pressure measurement platform under eyes open and eyes closed conditions. The Romberg indices of 5 center of pressure (COP) parameters were calculated: mediolateral displacement (RI MLD%), craniocaudal/anteroposterior displacement (RI CCD%), COP length (RI L%), average speed (RI AS), and support surface (RI SS%). Significant differences were observed between humans and dogs for RI CCD%, RI L%, and RI AS. Humans exhibited greater reliance on visual input for balance, indicated by higher RI values for these parameters, suggesting increased instability when blindfolded. In contrast, dogs showed lower RI values, indicating less reliance on vision and more stable postural control. The lack of significant differences in RI MLD% and RI SS% suggests similar mediolateral and support surface compensatory mechanisms between species. These findings reveal fundamental mechanistic differences in how balance is maintained between the two species.

Similar content being viewed by others

Development and validation of the puppy blues scale measuring temporary affective disturbance resembling baby blues

Article Open access 07 June 2024

Balance control in children and adolescents with intellectual disability: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Article Open access 17 October 2025

Effect of a single intra-articular administration of stanozolol in a naturally occurring canine osteoarthritis model: a randomised trial

Article Open access 07 April 2022

Data availability

The raw data supporting the findings of this article will be made available by the authors, on reasonable request by contacting the corresponding author.

Abbreviations

AS:

average speed of COP

BOS L:

length of the base of support

BOS W:

width of the base of support

BOS:

base of support

CCD:

craniocaudal (anteroposterior) displacement

COG:

center of gravity

COM:

center of mass

COP:

center of pressure

EC:

eyes closed

EO:

eyes open

GRF:

ground reaction force

IFz:

vertical impulse

L:

length of COP

MLD:

mediolateral displacement

PFz:

peak vertical force

PS:

postural stability

RI AS:

Romberg Index calculated from the average speed of COP movement

RI CCD%:

Romberg Index calculated from the normalized anterorposterior (craniocaudal) displacement of COP

RI L%:

Romberg Index calculated from the normalized length of COP

RI MLD%:

Romberg Index calculated from normalized mediolateral displacement of COP

RI SS%:

Romberg Index calculated from the normalized support surface of COP

RI:

Romberg indices

SD:

standard deviation

SI:

symmetry index

SS:

support surface of COP

References

  1. Pollock, A. S., Durward, B. R., Rowe, P. J. & Paul, J. P. What is balance?. Clin. Rehabil. 14, 402–406 (2000).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Faraldo-García, A., Santos-Pérez, S., Crujeiras-Casais, R., Labella-Caballero, T. & Soto-Varela, A. Influence of age and gender in the sensory analysis of balance control. Eur. Arch. Oto-Rhino-Laryngol. 269, 673–677 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Scherder, E. et al. Gait in ageing and associated dementias; its relationship with cognition. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 31, 485–497 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Winter, D. A., Patla, A. E., Ishac, M. & Gage, W. H. Motor mechanisms of balance during quiet standing. J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol. 13, 49–56 (2003).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ivanenko, Y. & Gurfinkel, V. S. Human postural control. Front. Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2018.00171 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Richmond, S. B., Fling, B. W., Lee, H. & Peterson, D. S. The assessment of center of mass and center of pressure during quiet stance: Current applications and future directions. J. Biomech. 123, 110485 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Paillard, T. Effects of general and local fatigue on postural control: A review. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 36, 162–176 (2012).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Krebs, D. E., Goldvasser, D., Lockert, J. D., Portney, L. G. & Gill-Body, K. M. Is base of support greater in unsteady gait?. Phys. Ther. 82, 138–147 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lutonsky, C. et al. Impact of aging and visual input on postural stability in dogs: Insights from center-of-pressure analysis. Sensors https://doi.org/10.3390/s25051300 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Carrillo, J. M. et al. Posturography and dynamic pedobarography in lame dogs with elbow dysplasia and cranial cruciate ligament rupture. BMC Vet. Res. 14, 108 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Morasiewicz, P. et al. Pedobarographic analysis of body weight distribution on the lower limbs and balance after ankle arthrodesis with Ilizarov fixation and internal fixation. Biomed. Eng. Online. 17, 174 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kul-Panza, E. & Berker, N. Pedobarographic findings in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Am. J. Phys. Med. Rehabil. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.phm.0000200377.52610.cd (2006).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pitti, L. et al. Assessment of static posturography and pedobarography for the detection of unilateral forelimb lameness in ponies. BMC Vet. Res. 14, 151 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Clayton, H. M., Buchholz, R. & Nauwelaerts, S. Relationship between morphological and stabilographic variables in standing horses. Vet. J. 198, e65–e69 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  15. López, S. et al. Center of pressure limb path differences for the detection of lameness in dogs: a preliminary study. BMC Vet. Res. 15, 138 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  16. Aghapour, M. et al. Effect of vision and surface slope on postural sway in healthy adults: A prospective cohort study. Life https://doi.org/10.3390/life14020227 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  17. De Cock, A., Vanrenterghem, J., Willems, T., Witvrouw, E. & De Clercq, D. The trajectory of the centre of pressure during barefoot running as a potential measure for foot function. Gait Posture. 27, 669–675 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  18. Chiu, M. C., Wu, H. C., Chang, L. Y. & Wu, M. H. Center of pressure progression characteristics under the plantar region for elderly adults. Gait Posture. 37, 408–412 (2013).

    Google Scholar 

  19. Reicher, B., Tichy, A. & Bockstahler, B. Center of pressure in the paws of clinically sound dogs in comparison with orthopedically diseased dogs. Animals https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081366 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bieber, B., Reicher, B., Tichy, A. & Bockstahler, B. Changes in ground reaction forces and center of pressure parameters of paws when wearing dog boots in dogs. Front. Vet. Sci. 9, 906277 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Charalambous, D., Strasser, T., Tichy, A. & Bockstahler, B. Ground reaction forces and center of pressure within the paws when stepping over obstacles in dogs. Animals https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12131702 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  22. Charalambous, D., Lutonsky, C., Keider, S., Tichy, A. & Bockstahler, B. Vertical ground reaction forces, paw pressure distribution, and center of pressure during heelwork in working dogs competing in obedience. Front. Vet. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1106170 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Palmieri, R. M., Ingersoll, C. D., Stone, M. B. & Krause, B. A. Center-of-pressure parameters used in the assessment of postural control. J. Sport Rehabil. 11, 51–66 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fereshtenejad, N., Saberi, S., Pol, F., Yeowell, G. & Sadeghi-Demneh, E. Intersession reliability of center of pressure measurement during bipedal standing with different foot placement angles. J. Bodyw. Mov. Ther. 39, 410–414 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  25. Manera, M. E. et al. Static posturography: A new perspective in the assessment of lameness in a canine model. PLoS One 12, e0170692 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Mondino, A. et al. Static posturography as a novel measure of the effects of aging on postural control in dogs. PLoS One 17, e0268390 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  27. Tjernström, F., Björklund, M. & Malmström, E.-M. Romberg ratio in quiet stance posturography–Test to retest reliability. Gait Posture 42, 27–31 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  28. Shaheen, A. F., Lins, D., Toledo, T. & Gómez Álvarez, C. B. Postural stability measures in healthy miniature Dachshunds obtained using a pressure mat and a force platform: A validity and reliability study. BMC Vet. Res. 19, 79 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  29. Clayton, H. M. & Nauwelaerts, S. Effect of blindfolding on centre of pressure variables in healthy horses during quiet standing. Vet. J. 199, 365–369 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  30. Dewolf, A. H., Ivanenko, Y. P., Mesquita, R. M. & Willems, P. A. Postural control in the elephant. J. Exp. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.243648 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Funato, T. et al. Postural control during quiet bipedal standing in rats. PLoS One 12, e0189248 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  32. Aghapour, M. et al. A validation study to analyze the reliability of center of pressure data in static posturography in dogs. Front. Vet. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2024.1353824 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  33. Kiss, R., Schedler, S. & Muehlbauer, T. Associations between types of balance performance in healthy individuals across the lifespan: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Physiol. 9, 1366 (2018).

    Google Scholar 

  34. Lutonsky, C. et al. External mechanical perturbations challenge postural stability in dogs. Front. Vet. Sci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1249951 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  35. Petró, B., Papachatzopoulou, A. & Kiss, R. M. Devices and tasks involved in the objective assessment of standing dynamic balancing – A systematic literature review. PLoS One 12, e0185188 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  36. Mademli, L. et al. Standing on unstable surface challenges postural control of tracking tasks and modulates neuromuscular adjustments specific to task complexity. Sci. Rep. 11, 6122 (2021).

    Google Scholar 

  37. Pai, Y.-C., Rogers, M. W., Patton, J., Cain, T. D. & Hanke, T. A. Static versus dynamic predictions of protective stepping following waist–pull perturbations in young and older adults. J. Biomech. 31, 1111–1118 (1998).

    Google Scholar 

  38. Deliagina, T. G. & Orlovsky, G. N. Comparative neurobiology of postural control. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 12, 652–657 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dunbar, D. C., Horak, F. B., Macpherson, J. M. & Rushmer, D. S. Neural control of quadrupedal and bipedal stance: Implications for the evolution of erect posture. Am. J. Phys. Anthropol. 69, 93–105 (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  40. Peterka, R. J. Comparison of human and humanoid robot control of upright stance. J. Physiol. 103, 149–158 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  41. Chang, Y.-H. & Ting, L. H. Mechanical evidence that flamingos can support their body on one leg with little active muscular force. Biol. Lett. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2016.0948 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  42. Macpherson, J. M. & Fung, J. Weight support and balance during perturbed stance in the chronic spinal cat. J. Neurophysiol. 82, 3066–3081 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  43. Karl, S., Boch, M., Virányi, Z., Lamm, C. & Huber, L. Training pet dogs for eye-tracking and awake fMRI. Behav. Res. Methods. 52, 838–856 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  44. Michael, H. E., McGowan, C. M. & Hyytiäinen, H. K. Posture and postural dysfunction in dogs: Implications for veterinary physiotherapy. Vet. J. 305, 106107 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

  45. Lutonsky, C. et al. Improving postural stability through proprioceptive training in dogs. Front Vet. Sci 12–2025, (2025).

  46. Lee, H., Han, S. & Hopkins, J. T. Altered visual reliance induced by stroboscopic glasses during postural control. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19, 2076 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  47. Lacour, M. et al. Sensory strategies in human postural control before and after unilateral vestibular neurotomy. Exp. Brain Res. 115, 300–310 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tanaka, H. & Uetake, T. Characteristics of postural sway in older adults standing on a soft surface. J. Hum. Ergol. (Tokyo). 34, 35–40 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  49. Błaszczyk, J. W., Beck, M. & Sadowska, D. Assessment of postural stability in young healthy subjects based on directional features of posturographic data: Vision and gender effects. Acta Neurobiol. Exp. (Wars). 74, 433–442 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  50. Johnson, T. A., Gordon-Evans, W. J., Lascelles, B. D. X. & Conzemius, M. G. Determination of the center of mass in a heterogeneous population of dogs. PLoS One 17, e0267361 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  51. Winter, D. A. Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement (wiley, 2009).

    Google Scholar 

  52. Sato, Y. et al. Measuring body sway of bipedally standing rat and quantitative evaluation of its postural control. 2015 37th Annual Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biology Soc. (EMBC). 5311-5314 https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2015.7319590 (2015).

  53. Mohamed Thangal, S. N. & Donelan, J. M. Scaling of inertial delays in terrestrial mammals. PLoS One 15, e0217188 (2020).

    Google Scholar 

  54. Hong, S. & Park, S. Biomechanical optimization and reinforcement learning provide insight into transition from ankle to hip strategy in human postural control. Sci. Rep. 15, 13640 (2025).

    Google Scholar 

  55. Wade, C. & Davis, J. Postural sway following prolonged exposure to an inclined surface. Saf. Sci. 47, 652–658 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  56. Wade, C. & Davis, J. Experience on an Elevated Inclined Surface and Postural Control. in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting vol. 49 1311–1314 (SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, (2005).

  57. Dutt-Mazumder, A., Slobounov, S. M., Challis, J. H. & Newell, K. M. Postural stability margins as a function of support surface slopes. PLoS One 11, e0164913 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  58. Lang, M. J., David, V. & Giese-Davis, J. The age conundrum: A scoping review of younger age or adolescent and young adult as a risk factor for clinical distress, depression, or anxiety in cancer. J. Adolesc. Young Adult Oncol. 4, 157–173 (2015).

    Google Scholar 

  59. Greer, K. A., Canterberry, S. C. & Murphy, K. E. Statistical analysis regarding the effects of height and weight on life span of the domestic dog. Res. Vet. Sci. 82, 208–214 (2007).

    Google Scholar 

  60. Wrightson, R., Albertini, M., Pirrone, F., McPeake, K. & Piotti, P. The relationship between signs of medical conditions and cognitive decline in senior dogs. Animals https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13132203 (2023).

    Google Scholar 

  61. Budsberg, S. C. et al. Evaluation of limb symmetry indices, using ground reaction forces in healthy dogs. Am. J. Vet. Res. 54, 1569–1574 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  62. Hernandez, M. E., Snider, J., Stevenson, C., Cauwenberghs, G. & Poizner, H. A correlation-based framework for evaluating postural control stochastic dynamics. IEEE Trans. neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. a Publ. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 24, 551–561 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  63. Onofrei, R. R. & Amaricai, E. Postural balance in relation with vision and physical activity in healthy young adults. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19095021 (2022).

    Google Scholar 

  64. Seres, I. G. et al. Preliminary studies on changes in static plantar pressure and stabilometry in patients with Ankylosing Spondylitis undergoing an exercise program. J. Clin. Med. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13164673 (2024).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors sincerely thank all participants, the dog owners for their trust and support, and the canine contributors for their patience and cooperation.

Funding

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This research was funded in whole or in part by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [https://doi.org/10.55776/P34959]. For open access purposes, the author has applied a CC BY public copyright license to any author accepted manuscript version arising from this submission.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Masoud Aghapour and Nadja Affenzeller contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Physical Therapy, Clinical Centre for Small Animal Health and Research, Clinical Department for Small Animals and Horses, University of Veterinary Medicine (vetmeduni), Vienna, Austria

    Masoud Aghapour, Nadja Affenzeller, Christiane Lutonsky & Barbara Bockstahler

  2. Behavioural Medicine, Clinical Centre for Small Animal Health and Research, Clinical Department for Small Animals and Horses, University of Veterinary Medicine (vetmeduni), Vienna, Austria

    Nadja Affenzeller

  3. Movement Science Group, Clinical Centre for Equine Health and Research, Clinical Department for Small Animals and Horses, University of Veterinary Medicine (vetmeduni), Vienna, Austria

    Christian Peham

Authors
  1. Masoud Aghapour
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nadja Affenzeller
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Christiane Lutonsky
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christian Peham
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Barbara Bockstahler
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization: M.A., N.A., C.P., C.L. and B.B.; data curation: M.A., N.A., C.P., C.L., and B.B.; formal analysis: M.A., N.A., C.L.; and B.B.; funding acquisition: B.B.; investigation: M.A., N.A., C.P., C.L. and B.B.; methodology: M.A., N.A., C.P., C.L., and B.B.; project administration: B.B.; resources: B.B.; supervision: B.B.; validation: M.A., N.A., C.P., C.L., and B.B.; visualization: M.A., N.A., C.P., C.L., and B.B.; writing—original draft: M.A.; writing—review and editing: M.A., N.A., C.P., C.L., and B.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Masoud Aghapour.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1 (download PDF )

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aghapour, M., Affenzeller, N., Lutonsky, C. et al. Different strategies of bipeds and quadrupeds to maintain postural stability- a comparison of healthy humans and dogs via static posturography. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42726-2

Download citation

  • Received: 12 May 2025

  • Accepted: 27 February 2026

  • Published: 09 March 2026

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-42726-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Keywords

  • Center of pressure
  • Gait analysis
  • Posturography
  • Ground reaction forces
  • Romberg Index
Download PDF

Advertisement

Explore content

  • Research articles
  • News & Comment
  • Collections
  • Subjects
  • Follow us on Facebook
  • Follow us on X
  • Sign up for alerts
  • RSS feed

About the journal

  • About Scientific Reports
  • Contact
  • Journal policies
  • Guide to referees
  • Calls for Papers
  • Editor's Choice
  • Journal highlights
  • Open Access Fees and Funding

Publish with us

  • For authors
  • Language editing services
  • Open access funding
  • Submit manuscript

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

  • Explore articles by subject
  • Find a job
  • Guide to authors
  • Editorial policies

Scientific Reports (Sci Rep)

ISSN 2045-2322 (online)

nature.com footer links

About Nature Portfolio

  • About us
  • Press releases
  • Press office
  • Contact us

Discover content

  • Journals A-Z
  • Articles by subject
  • protocols.io
  • Nature Index

Publishing policies

  • Nature portfolio policies
  • Open access

Author & Researcher services

  • Reprints & permissions
  • Research data
  • Language editing
  • Scientific editing
  • Nature Masterclasses
  • Research Solutions

Libraries & institutions

  • Librarian service & tools
  • Librarian portal
  • Open research
  • Recommend to library

Advertising & partnerships

  • Advertising
  • Partnerships & Services
  • Media kits
  • Branded content

Professional development

  • Nature Awards
  • Nature Careers
  • Nature Conferences

Regional websites

  • Nature Africa
  • Nature China
  • Nature India
  • Nature Japan
  • Nature Middle East
  • Privacy Policy
  • Use of cookies
  • Legal notice
  • Accessibility statement
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Your US state privacy rights
Springer Nature

© 2026 Springer Nature Limited

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing