Literature DB >> 2324672

Energetics of ascent: insects on inclines.

R J Full1, A Tullis.   

Abstract

Small animals use more metabolic energy per unit mass than large animals to run on a level surface. If the cost to lift one gram of mass one vertical meter is constant, small animals should require proportionally smaller increases in metabolic cost to run uphill. To test this hypothesis on very small animals possessing an exceptional capacity for ascending steep gradients, we measured the metabolic cost of locomotion in the cockroach, Periplaneta americana, running at angles of 0, 45 and 90 degrees to the horizontal. Resting oxygen consumption (VO2rest) was not affected by incline angle. Steady-state oxygen consumption (VO2ss) increased linearly with speed at all angles of ascent. The minimum cost of locomotion (the slope of the VO2ss versus speed function) increased with increasing angle of ascent. The minimum cost of locomotion on 45 and 90 degrees inclines was two and three times greater, respectively, than the cost during horizontal running. The cockroach's metabolic cost of ascent greatly exceeds that predicted from the hypothesis of a constant efficiency for vertical work. Variations in stride frequency and contact time cannot account for the high metabolic cost, because they were independent of incline angle. An increase in the metabolic cost or amount of force production may best explain the increase in metabolic cost. Small animals, such as P. americana, can easily scale vertical surfaces, but the energetic cost is considerable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1990        PMID: 2324672     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.149.1.307

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  18 in total

1.  Cockroaches traverse crevices, crawl rapidly in confined spaces, and inspire a soft, legged robot.

Authors:  Kaushik Jayaram; Robert J Full
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-02-08       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  The cost of incline locomotion in ghost crabs (Ocypode quadrata) of different sizes.

Authors:  Alexa Tullis; Scott C Andrus
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 2.200

3.  The interactions between temperature and activity levels in driving metabolic rate: theory, with empirical validation from contrasting ectotherms.

Authors:  L G Halsey; P G D Matthews; E L Rezende; L Chauvaud; A A Robson
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2015-01-10       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Gripping during climbing of arboreal snakes may be safe but not economical.

Authors:  Greg Byrnes; Bruce C Jayne
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.703

5.  Locomotor energetics in primates: gait mechanics and their relationship to the energetics of vertical and horizontal locomotion.

Authors:  Jandy B Hanna; Daniel Schmitt
Journal:  Am J Phys Anthropol       Date:  2011-01-04       Impact factor: 2.868

6.  A unified theory for the energy cost of legged locomotion.

Authors:  Herman Pontzer
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 3.703

7.  Physiological responses to gravity in an insect.

Authors:  Jon F Harrison; Khaled Adjerid; Anelia Kassi; C Jaco Klok; John M VandenBrooks; Meghan E Duell; Jacob B Campbell; Stav Talal; Christopher D Abdo; Kamel Fezzaa; Hodjat Pendar; John J Socha
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-01-13       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Comparing inclined locomotion in a ground-living and a climbing ant species: sagittal plane kinematics.

Authors:  Tom Weihmann; Reinhard Blickhan
Journal:  J Comp Physiol A Neuroethol Sens Neural Behav Physiol       Date:  2009-09-16       Impact factor: 1.836

9.  Overcoming an evolutionary conflict: removal of a reproductive organ greatly increases locomotor performance.

Authors:  Margarita Ramos; Duncan J Irschick; Terry E Christenson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2004-03-19       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  The metabolic cost of walking on an incline in the Peacock (Pavo cristatus).

Authors:  Holly Wilkinson; Nathan Thavarajah; Jonathan Codd
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2015-06-02       Impact factor: 2.984

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.