ArticleScientific reports2025
Control of limb loading during active horizontal perturbations at moderate and fast trots in rats.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A novel behavioral paradigm using mice to study predictive postural control.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To understand how small animals cope with complex, unstructured, and unpredictable substrates, we analysed the kinetics of female rats ([Formula: see text]) moving at a fast and at a moderate trot over an unperturbed substrate and a substrate subjected to active horizontal perturbations. Perturbations were active single forwards or backwards displacements of an instrumented platform by 5 mm or 10 mm amplitudes in 0.05 s. Single leg ground reaction forces (SLGRF) were collected for unperturbed and perturbed locomotion (hindlimbs: 50/102, forelimbs: 45/130, respectively). When negotiating horizontal perturbations, rats displayed gait resetting (braking, accelerating) and non-resetting behaviours. Feedforward strategies differed between the fore- and hindlimbs. In circa 60% of the perturbed trials, forelimbs started the step in acceleration mode, while hindlimbs began the stance mostly in non-resetting mode (∼45%). In about 50% of all perturbed steps, the impulse provided by the SLGRF displayed a change in behaviour according to the expected response to the perturbation. The remaining 50% retained the feedforward strategy. Still, most perturbed trials displayed changes in SLGRF patterns that indicated passive and active reactions to platform shifts. Our results indicate that rats' sensorimotor control system tunes fore- and hindlimbs differently in expectation of a perturbation. In addition, the tendon-muscle systems of the limbs are recruited to prevent leg collapse at the beginning and end of the stance. At lower speeds, spinal and/or higher centre commands have enough time to re-adapt limb behaviour. At higher locomotion speeds, rats rely more on their limbs' intrinsic stability and feedforward control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.