Recent advances in integrative studies of locomotion have revealed several general principles. Energy storage and exchange mechanisms discovered in walking and running bipeds apply to multilegged locomotion and even to flying and swimming. Nonpropulsive lateral forces can be sizable, but they may benefit stability, maneuverability, or other criteria that become apparent in natural environments. Locomotor control systems combine rapid mechanical preflexes with multimodal sensory feedback and feedforward commands. Muscles have a surprising variety of functions in locomotion, serving as motors, brakes, springs, and struts. Integrative approaches reveal not only how each component within a locomotor system operates but how they function as a collective whole.

The amount of energy used to run a mile is nearly the same whether it is run at top speed or at a leisurely pace (although it is used more rapidly at the higher speed). This puzzling independence of energy cost and speed is found generally among running animals, although, on a per gram basis, cost is much higher for smaller animals. Running involves little work against the environment; work is done by muscles and tendons to lift and accelerate the body and limbs. Some of the work is recovered from muscle-tendon springs without metabolic cost and work rate does not parallel metabolic rate with either speed or size. Regardless of the amount of work muscles do, they must be activated and develop force to support the weight of the body. Load-carrying experiments have shown that the cost of supporting an extra newton of load is the same as the weight-specific cost of running. Size differences in cost are proportional to stride frequency at equivalent speeds, suggesting that the time available for developing force is important in determining cost. We report a simple inverse relationship between the rate of energy used for running and the time the foot applies force to the ground during each stride. These results support the hypothesis that it is primarily the cost of supporting the animal's weight and the time course of generating this force that determines the cost of running.

No abstract

No abstract

The metabolic energy cost of walking is determined, to a large degree, by body mass, but it is not clear how body composition and mass distribution influence this cost. We tested the hypothesis that walking would be most expensive for obese women compared with obese men and normal-weight women and men. Furthermore, we hypothesized that for all groups, preferred walking speed would correspond to the speed that minimized the gross energy cost per distance. We measured body composition, maximal oxygen consumption, and preferred walking speed of 39 (19 class II obese, 20 normal weight) women and men. We also measured oxygen consumption and carbon dioxide production while the subjects walked on a level treadmill at six speeds (0.50-1.75 m/s). Both obesity and sex affected the net metabolic rate (W/kg) of walking. Net metabolic rates of obese subjects were only approximately 10% greater (per kg) than for normal-weight subjects, and net metabolic rates for women were approximately 10% greater than for men. The increase in net metabolic rate at faster walking speeds was greatest in obese women compared with the other groups. Preferred walking speed was not different across groups (1.42 m/s) and was near the speed that minimized gross energy cost per distance. Surprisingly, mass distribution (thigh mass/body mass) was not related to net metabolic rate, but body composition (% fat) was (r2= 0.43). Detailed biomechanical studies of walking are needed to investigate whether obese individuals adopt novel energy saving mechanisms during walking.

Distal leg loads increase the metabolic rate required for swinging the leg. The increase in metabolic rate with more proximal loads may be attributable to a combination of supporting (via hip abduction muscles) and propagating the swing leg.

BackgroundReducing the energetic cost of running seems the most feasible path to a sub-2-hour marathon. Footwear mass, cushioning, and bending stiffness each affect the energetic cost of running. Recently, prototype running shoes were developed that combine a new highly compliant and resilient midsole material with a stiff embedded plate.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine if, and to what extent, these newly developed running shoes reduce the energetic cost of running compared with established marathon racing shoes.Methods18 high-caliber athletes ran six 5-min trials (three shoes × two replicates) in prototype shoes (NP), and two established marathon shoes (NS and AB) during three separate sessions: 14, 16, and 18 km/h. We measured submaximal oxygen uptake and carbon dioxide production during minutes 3–5 and averaged energetic cost (W/kg) for the two trials in each shoe model.ResultsCompared with the established racing shoes, the new shoes reduced the energetic cost of running in all 18 subjects tested. Averaged across all three velocities, the energetic cost for running in the NP shoes (16.45 ± 0.89 W/kg; mean ± SD) was 4.16 and 4.01% lower than in the NS and AB shoes, when shoe mass was matched (17.16 ± 0.92 and 17.14 ± 0.97 W/kg, respectively, both p < 0.001). The observed percent changes were independent of running velocity (14–18 km/h).ConclusionThe prototype shoes lowered the energetic cost of running by 4% on average. We predict that with these shoes, top athletes could run substantially faster and achieve the first sub-2-hour marathon.

We sought to understand how leg muscle function determines the metabolic cost of walking. We first indirectly assessed the metabolic cost of swinging the legs and then examined the cost of generating muscular force during the stance phase. Four men and four women walked at 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, and 2.0 m/s carrying loads equal to 0, 10, 20, and 30% body mass positioned symmetrically about the waist. The net metabolic rate increased in nearly direct proportion to the external mechanical power during moderate-speed (0.5-1.5 m/s) load carrying, suggesting that the cost of swinging the legs is relatively small. The active muscle volume required to generate force on the ground and the rate of generating this force accounted for >85% of the increase in net metabolic rate across moderate speeds and most loading conditions. Although these factors explained less of the increase in metabolic rate between 1.5 and 2.0 m/s ( approximately 50%), the cost of generating force per unit volume of active muscle [i.e., the cost coefficient (k)] was similar across all conditions [k = 0.11 +/- 0.03 (SD) J/cm3]. These data indicate that, regardless of the work muscles do, the metabolic cost of walking can be largely explained by the cost of generating muscular force during the stance phase.