Advertisement

Multisensory control of human upright stance

  • C. MaurerEmail author
  • T. Mergner
  • R.J. Peterka
Research Article

Abstract

The interaction of different orientation senses contributing to posture control is not well understood. We therefore performed experiments in which we measured the postural responses of normal subjects and vestibular loss patients during perturbation of their stance. Subjects stood on a motion platform with their eyes closed and auditory cues masked. The perturbing stimuli consisted of either platform tilts or external torque produced by force-controlled pull of the subjects’ body on a stationary platform. Furthermore, we presented trials in which these two stimuli were applied when the platform was body-sway referenced (i.e., coupled 1:1 to body position, by which ankle joint proprioceptive feedback is essentially removed). We analyzed subjects’ postural responses, i.e., the excursions of their center of mass (COM) and center of pressure (COP), using a systems analysis approach. We found gain and phase of the responses to vary as a function of stimulus frequency and in relation to the absence versus presence of vestibular and proprioceptive cues. In addition, gain depended on stimulus amplitude, reflecting a non-linearity in the control. The experimental results were compared to simulation results obtained from an ‘inverted pendulum’ model of posture control. In the model, sensor fusion mechanisms yield internal estimates of the external stimuli, i.e., of the external torque (pull), the platform tilt and gravity. These estimates are derived from three sensor systems: ankle proprioceptors, vestibular sensors and plantar pressure sensors (somatosensory graviceptors). They are fed as global set point signals into a local control loop of the ankle joints, which is based on proprioceptive negative feedback. This local loop stabilizes the body-on-foot support, while the set point signals upgrade the loop into a body-in-space control. Amplitude non-linearity was implemented in the model in the form of central threshold mechanisms. In model simulations that combined sensor fusion and thresholds, an automatic context-specific sensory re-weighting across stimulus conditions occurred. Model parameters were identified using an optimization procedure. Results suggested that in the sway-referenced condition normal subjects altered their postural strategy by strongly weighting feedback from plantar somatosensory force sensors. Taking this strategy change into account, the model’s simulation results well paralleled all experimental results across all conditions tested.

Keywords

Postural control Dynamic model Multisensory integration Sensor fusion Set point principle Vestibular system 

Notes

Acknowledgments

DFG Me 715/5-2,3; NIH AG17960

References

  1. Bendat JS, Piersol AG (2000) Random data: analysis and measurement procedures. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Diekmann V, Jürgens R, Becker W (2004) Maintaining spatial body alignment on a rotating platform by means of active counter-circling: role of vestibular and podokinesthetic afferents. Exp Brain Res 158:504–518PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dietz V (1993) Gating of reflexes in ankle muscle during human stance and gait. Prog Brain Res 97:181–188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Duysens J, Clarac F, Cruse H (2000) Load-regulating mechanisms in gait and posture: comparative aspects. Physiol Rev 80:83–132PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Hlavacka F, Mergner T, Krizkova M (1996) Control of the body vertical by vestibular and proprioceptive inputs. Brain Res Bull 40:431–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Horak FB, Macpherson JM (1996) Postural orientation and equilibrium. In: Rowell L, Shepherd J (eds) Handbook of physiology, 1, exercise: regulation and integration of multiple systems. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 255–292Google Scholar
  7. Horak FB, Nashner LM, Diener HC (1990) Postural strategies associated with somatosensory and vestibular loss. Exp Brain Res 82:167–177PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Inglis JT, Horak FB, Shupert CL, Jones-Rycewicz C (1994) The importance of somatosensory information in triggering and scaling automatic postural responses in humans. Exp Brain Res 101:159–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Jeka J, Oie KS, Kiemel T (2000) Multisensory information for human postural control: integrating touch and vision. Exp Brain Res 134:107–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Johansson R, Magnusson M (1991) Human postural dynamics. Biomed Eng 18:413–437Google Scholar
  11. Kavounoudias A, Roll R, Roll J-P (2001) Foot sole and ankle muscle inputs contribute jointly to human erect posture regulation. J Physiol (Lond) 5532:869–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. van der Kooij H, Jacobs R, Koopman B, Grootenboer H (1999) A multisensory integration model of human stance control. Biol Cybern 80:299–308PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. van der Kooij H, Jacobs R, Koopman B, van der Helm F (2001) An adaptive model of sensory integration in a dynamic environment applied to human stance control. Biol Cybern 84:103–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. van der Kooij H, van Asseldonk E, van Helm FCT (2005) Comparison of different methods to identify and quantify balance control. J Neurosci Methods 145:175–203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lagarias JC, Reeds JA, Wright MH, Wright PE (1998) Convergence properties of the Nelder–Mead simplex method in low dimensions. SIAM J Optim 9:112–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Magnusson M, Enbom H, Johansson R, Pyykko I (1990) Significance of pressor input from the human feet in anterior–posterior postural control. The effect of hypothermia on vibration induced body-sway. Acta Otolaryngol (Stockholm) 110:182–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Maurer C, Peterka RJ (2005) A new interpretation of spontaneous sway measures based on a simple model of human postural control. J Neurophysiol 93:189–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Maurer C, Mergner T, Bolha B, Hlavacka F (2000) Vestibular, visual, and somatosensory contributions to human control of upright stance. Neurosci Lett 281:99–102PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Maurer C, Mergner T, Bolha B, Hlavacka F (2001) Human balance control during cutaneous stimulation of the plantar soles. Neurosci Lett 302:45–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Merfeld DM (1995) Modeling the vestibulo-ocular reflex of the squirrel monkey during eccentric rotation and roll tilt. Exp Brain Res 106:123–134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mergner T (2004) Meta level concept versus classic reflex concept for the control of posture and movement. Arch Ital Biol 142:175–198PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Mergner T, Glasauer S (1999) A simple model of vestibular canal–otolith signal fusion. Ann NY Acad Sci 871:430–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mergner T, Rosemeier T (1998) Interaction of vestibular, somatosensory and visual signals for posture control and motion perception under terrestrial and microgravity conditions. Brain Res Rev 28:118–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mergner T, Siebold C, Schweigart G, Becker W (1991) Human perception of horizontal head and trunk rotation in space during vestibular and neck stimulation. Exp Brain Res 85:389–404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mergner T, Hlavacka F, Schweigart G (1993) Interaction of vestibular and proprioceptive inputs. J Vestib Res 3:41–57PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Mergner T, Huber W, Becker W (1997) Vestibular-neck interaction and transformations of sensory coordinates. J Vestib Res 7:119–135PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mergner T, Nasios G, Maurer C, Becker W (2001) Visual object localization in space. Interaction of retinal, eye position, vestibular and neck proprioceptive information. Exp Brain Res 141:33–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mergner T, Maurer C, Peterka RJ (2003) A multisensory posture control model of human upright stance. In: Prablanc C, Pélisson D, Rossetti Y (eds) Neural control of space coding and action production. Prog Brain Res 142:189–201Google Scholar
  29. Mergner T, Schweigart G, Maurer C, Blümle A (2005) Human postural responses to motion of real and virtual visual environments under different support base conditions. Exp Brain Res [Epub ahead of print, DOI 10.1007/s00221-005-0065-3]Google Scholar
  30. Mittelstaedt H (1996) Somatic graviception. Biol Psychol 42:53–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nashner LM (1972) Vestibular postural control model. Kybernetik 10:106–110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Peterka RJ (2000) Postural control model interpretation of stabilogram diffusion analysis. Biol Cybern 82:335–343PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Peterka RJ (2002) Sensorimotor integration in human postural control. J Neurophysiol 88:1097–1118PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Peterka RJ (2003) Simplifying the complexities of maintaining balance. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 22:63–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Peterka RJ, Loughlin PJ (2004) Dynamic regulation of sensorimotor integration in human postural control. J Neurophysiol 91:410–423PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Thoumie P, Do MC (1996) Changes in motor activity and biomechanics during balance recovery following cutaneous and muscular deafferentation. Exp Brain Res 110:289–297PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Winter DA (1990) Biomechanics and motor control of human movement, 2nd edn. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Winter DA, Patla AE, Prince F, Ishac M, Gielo-Perczak K (1998) Stiffness control of balance in quiet standing. J Neurophysiol 80:1211–1221PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Wu G, Chiang JH (1997) The significance of somatosensory stimulations to the human foot in the control of postural reflexes. Exp Brain Res 114:163–169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Yasui S, Young LR (1975) Perceived visual motion as effective stimulus to pursuit eye movement system. Science 190:906–908PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zupan L, Merfeld DM, Darlot C (2002) Using sensory weighting to model the influence of canal, otolith and visual cues on spatial orientation and eye movements. Biol Cybern 86:209–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Neurological University ClinicFreiburgGermany
  2. 2.Neurological Sciences InstituteOregon Health and Science UniversityPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations