Adaptations for economical bipedal running: The effect of limb structure on three-dimensional joint mechanics

Jonas Rubenson, David G. Lloyd, Denham B. Heliams, Thor F. Besier, Paul A. Fournier

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

68 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine the mechanical adaptations linked to economical locomotion in cursorial bipeds. We addressed this question by comparing mass-matched humans and avian bipeds (ostriches), which exhibit marked differences in limb structure and running economy. We hypothesized that the nearly 50 per cent lower energy cost of running in ostriches is a result of: (i) lower limb-swing mechanical power, (ii) greater stance-phase storage and release of elastic energy, and (iii) lower total muscle power output. To test these hypotheses, we used three-dimensional joint mechanical measurements and a simple model to estimate the elastic and muscle contributions to joint work and power. Contradictory to our first hypothesis, we found that ostriches and humans generate the same amounts of mechanical power to swing the limbs at a similar self-selected running speed, indicating that limb swing probably does not contribute to the difference in energy cost of running between these species. In contrast, we estimated that ostriches generate 120 per cent more stance-phase mechanical joint power via release of elastic energy compared with humans. This elastic mechanical power occurs nearly exclusively at the tarsometatarso- phalangeal joint, demonstrating a shift of mechanical power generation to distal joints compared with humans. We also estimated that positive muscle fibre power is 35 per cent lower in ostriches compared with humans, and is accounted for primarily by higher capacity for storage and release of elastic energy. Furthermore, our analysis revealed much larger frontal and internal/external rotation joint loads during ostrich running than in humans. Together, these findings support the hypothesis that a primary limb structure specialization linked to economical running in cursorial species is an elevated storage and release of elastic energy in tendon. In the ostrich, energy-saving specializations may also include passive frontal and internal/external rotation load-bearing mechanisms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)740-755
Number of pages16
JournalJournal of the Royal Society Interface
Volume8
Issue number58
DOIs
StatePublished - May 6 2011

Fingerprint

Struthioniformes
Mechanics
Running
Muscle
Extremities
Joints
Bearings (structural)
Tendons
Power generation
Costs
Energy conservation
Muscles
Fibers
Costs and Cost Analysis
Weight-Bearing
Locomotion
Lower Extremity

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Biotechnology
  • Biophysics
  • Bioengineering
  • Biomaterials
  • Biochemistry
  • Biomedical Engineering

Cite this

Rubenson, Jonas ; Lloyd, David G. ; Heliams, Denham B. ; Besier, Thor F. ; Fournier, Paul A. / Adaptations for economical bipedal running : The effect of limb structure on three-dimensional joint mechanics. In: Journal of the Royal Society Interface. 2011 ; Vol. 8, No. 58. pp. 740-755.
@article{7ccc98371065485bb66ebdc5e5061604,
title = "Adaptations for economical bipedal running: The effect of limb structure on three-dimensional joint mechanics",
abstract = "The purpose of this study was to examine the mechanical adaptations linked to economical locomotion in cursorial bipeds. We addressed this question by comparing mass-matched humans and avian bipeds (ostriches), which exhibit marked differences in limb structure and running economy. We hypothesized that the nearly 50 per cent lower energy cost of running in ostriches is a result of: (i) lower limb-swing mechanical power, (ii) greater stance-phase storage and release of elastic energy, and (iii) lower total muscle power output. To test these hypotheses, we used three-dimensional joint mechanical measurements and a simple model to estimate the elastic and muscle contributions to joint work and power. Contradictory to our first hypothesis, we found that ostriches and humans generate the same amounts of mechanical power to swing the limbs at a similar self-selected running speed, indicating that limb swing probably does not contribute to the difference in energy cost of running between these species. In contrast, we estimated that ostriches generate 120 per cent more stance-phase mechanical joint power via release of elastic energy compared with humans. This elastic mechanical power occurs nearly exclusively at the tarsometatarso- phalangeal joint, demonstrating a shift of mechanical power generation to distal joints compared with humans. We also estimated that positive muscle fibre power is 35 per cent lower in ostriches compared with humans, and is accounted for primarily by higher capacity for storage and release of elastic energy. Furthermore, our analysis revealed much larger frontal and internal/external rotation joint loads during ostrich running than in humans. Together, these findings support the hypothesis that a primary limb structure specialization linked to economical running in cursorial species is an elevated storage and release of elastic energy in tendon. In the ostrich, energy-saving specializations may also include passive frontal and internal/external rotation load-bearing mechanisms.",
author = "Jonas Rubenson and Lloyd, {David G.} and Heliams, {Denham B.} and Besier, {Thor F.} and Fournier, {Paul A.}",
year = "2011",
month = "5",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1098/rsif.2010.0466",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "8",
pages = "740--755",
journal = "Journal of the Royal Society Interface",
issn = "1742-5689",
publisher = "Royal Society of London",
number = "58",

}

Adaptations for economical bipedal running : The effect of limb structure on three-dimensional joint mechanics. / Rubenson, Jonas; Lloyd, David G.; Heliams, Denham B.; Besier, Thor F.; Fournier, Paul A.

In: Journal of the Royal Society Interface, Vol. 8, No. 58, 06.05.2011, p. 740-755.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Adaptations for economical bipedal running

T2 - The effect of limb structure on three-dimensional joint mechanics

AU - Rubenson, Jonas

AU - Lloyd, David G.

AU - Heliams, Denham B.

AU - Besier, Thor F.

AU - Fournier, Paul A.

PY - 2011/5/6

Y1 - 2011/5/6

N2 - The purpose of this study was to examine the mechanical adaptations linked to economical locomotion in cursorial bipeds. We addressed this question by comparing mass-matched humans and avian bipeds (ostriches), which exhibit marked differences in limb structure and running economy. We hypothesized that the nearly 50 per cent lower energy cost of running in ostriches is a result of: (i) lower limb-swing mechanical power, (ii) greater stance-phase storage and release of elastic energy, and (iii) lower total muscle power output. To test these hypotheses, we used three-dimensional joint mechanical measurements and a simple model to estimate the elastic and muscle contributions to joint work and power. Contradictory to our first hypothesis, we found that ostriches and humans generate the same amounts of mechanical power to swing the limbs at a similar self-selected running speed, indicating that limb swing probably does not contribute to the difference in energy cost of running between these species. In contrast, we estimated that ostriches generate 120 per cent more stance-phase mechanical joint power via release of elastic energy compared with humans. This elastic mechanical power occurs nearly exclusively at the tarsometatarso- phalangeal joint, demonstrating a shift of mechanical power generation to distal joints compared with humans. We also estimated that positive muscle fibre power is 35 per cent lower in ostriches compared with humans, and is accounted for primarily by higher capacity for storage and release of elastic energy. Furthermore, our analysis revealed much larger frontal and internal/external rotation joint loads during ostrich running than in humans. Together, these findings support the hypothesis that a primary limb structure specialization linked to economical running in cursorial species is an elevated storage and release of elastic energy in tendon. In the ostrich, energy-saving specializations may also include passive frontal and internal/external rotation load-bearing mechanisms.

AB - The purpose of this study was to examine the mechanical adaptations linked to economical locomotion in cursorial bipeds. We addressed this question by comparing mass-matched humans and avian bipeds (ostriches), which exhibit marked differences in limb structure and running economy. We hypothesized that the nearly 50 per cent lower energy cost of running in ostriches is a result of: (i) lower limb-swing mechanical power, (ii) greater stance-phase storage and release of elastic energy, and (iii) lower total muscle power output. To test these hypotheses, we used three-dimensional joint mechanical measurements and a simple model to estimate the elastic and muscle contributions to joint work and power. Contradictory to our first hypothesis, we found that ostriches and humans generate the same amounts of mechanical power to swing the limbs at a similar self-selected running speed, indicating that limb swing probably does not contribute to the difference in energy cost of running between these species. In contrast, we estimated that ostriches generate 120 per cent more stance-phase mechanical joint power via release of elastic energy compared with humans. This elastic mechanical power occurs nearly exclusively at the tarsometatarso- phalangeal joint, demonstrating a shift of mechanical power generation to distal joints compared with humans. We also estimated that positive muscle fibre power is 35 per cent lower in ostriches compared with humans, and is accounted for primarily by higher capacity for storage and release of elastic energy. Furthermore, our analysis revealed much larger frontal and internal/external rotation joint loads during ostrich running than in humans. Together, these findings support the hypothesis that a primary limb structure specialization linked to economical running in cursorial species is an elevated storage and release of elastic energy in tendon. In the ostrich, energy-saving specializations may also include passive frontal and internal/external rotation load-bearing mechanisms.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953250657&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79953250657&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1098/rsif.2010.0466

DO - 10.1098/rsif.2010.0466

M3 - Article

C2 - 21030429

AN - SCOPUS:79953250657

VL - 8

SP - 740

EP - 755

JO - Journal of the Royal Society Interface

JF - Journal of the Royal Society Interface

SN - 1742-5689

IS - 58

ER -