How muscles accommodate movement in different physical environments: aquatic vs. terrestrial locomotion in vertebrates

Gillis, Gary B.; Blob, Richard W.

doi:10.1016/s1095-6433(01)00466-4

Cited by 90 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings accord to the conclusions drawn from earlier studies which compare jumping and swimming in other anurans (Kamel et al, 1996;Gillis and Biewener, 2000;Gillis and Blob, 2001; but see Emerson and De Jongh, 1980). Thus, the divergence between jumping and swimming impulses must seemingly be attributed to differences in the neuronal hind limb control, an assumption that is likely reinforced by the fact that no correlations could be detected between individual maximal jumping and swimming performance (Nauwelaerts et al, 2007;Nauwelaerts et al, 2005a).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Environmentally induced mechanical feedback in locomotion: Frog performance as a model

Aerts

Nauwelaerts

2009

Journal of Theoretical Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A c c e p t e d m a n u s c r i p t 2 AbstractAt first glance, the strategy for generating propulsive impulses for both jumping and swimming in frogs is quite similar. Both modes rely on powerful extension of the hind limbs.However, in Rana esculenta (the semi-aquatic green frog), propulsive impulses for jumping were found to be much larger than those generated during swimming (Nauwelaerts and Aerts, 2003). The hypothesis that differences in propulsive impulse between swimming and jumping are largely caused by specific environmental constraints rather than being due to changes in motor control is tested in the present study. To assess this question, the actuator of a simple mathematical model, mimicking a frog with symmetrically kicking hind limbs, is first tuned to perform frog-like jumps. Next, the same actuator activation is applied to drive the model in an 'aquatic environment'. Despite the entirely identical activation, the resulting in silico propulsive swimming impulse was less than half that produced during jumping, just as observed in vivo. Although duration of limb extension is similar for both locomotor modes (both in vivo and in silico), this conspicuous difference in model behaviour is entirely explained by the actuator working at different positions along its force-velocity curve. These findings suggest that the same environmentally induced effects are also involved in real swimming and jumping as well, thus explaining the apparent difference in performance level.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Environmentally induced mechanical feedback in locomotion: Frog performance as a model

Aerts

Nauwelaerts

2009

Journal of Theoretical Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of the strongest functional demands that animals face are posed by the physical habitats in which they live (Denny 1993;Gillis and Blob 2001;AshleyRoss et al 2013;Blob and Higham 2014). Among vertebrates, one of the most fundamental distinctions in habitat is between aquatic and terrestrial environments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These taxa are sometimes referred to as ''semiaquatic,'' but this description from the aquatic perspective may not fully capture the conditions that such species experience. Living ''on the fence'' between two habitats can pose distinct functional challenges, particularly when the demands of those habitats differ (Gillis and Blob 2001). But among such taxa, lineages more exclusively specialized for aquatic lifestyles have also evolved (Renous et al 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The fusion of the trunk vertebrae to a bony shell in turtles makes most of the body axis inflexible, except for the neck and tail. Thus, given the limited role of the tail in locomotion for most turtle species (Willey and Blob 2004), tests of how locomotor function changes across habitats can be simplified in turtles by focusing on the limbs as the primary propulsive structures (Gillis and Blob 2001;Pace et al 2001;Rivera et al 2006). Given the significance of limb usage during the early stages of aquatic invasion for many groups of vertebrates (Fish 1996;Smith and Clarke 2014), insights generated from studies of turtles should have broad relevance, even among non-shelled lineages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given that the forces to which animals are exposed during locomotion differ substantially between water and land (Gillis and Blob 2001;Blob et al 2003;, we sought to test whether changes in skeletal loading environment between swimming and walking might have facilitated an evolutionary transition from tubular to flattened limb bones (Young and Blob 2015a). To perform these tests, we compared in vivo strains on the femora of slider turtles (Trachemys scripta) between swimming in a flow tank and walking on a treadmill (Young and Blob 2015a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

“On the Fence” versus “All in”: Insights from Turtles for the Evolution of Aquatic Locomotor Specializations and Habitat Transitions in Tetrapod Vertebrates

Blob

Mayerl

Rivera

et al. 2016

Integr. Comp. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Synopsis Though ultimately descended from terrestrial amniotes, turtles have deep roots as an aquatic lineage and are quite diverse in the extent of their aquatic specializations. Many taxa can be viewed as ''on the fence'' between aquatic and terrestrial realms, whereas others have independently hyperspecialized and moved ''all in'' to aquatic habitats. Such differences in specialization are reflected strongly in the locomotor system. We have conducted several studies to evaluate the performance consequences of such variation in design, as well as the mechanisms through which specialization for aquatic locomotion is facilitated in turtles. One path to aquatic hyperspecialization has involved the evolutionary transformation of the forelimbs from rowing, tubular limbs with distal paddles into flapping, flattened flippers, as in sea turtles. Prior to the advent of any hydrodynamic advantages, the evolution of such flippers may have been enabled by a reduction in twisting loads on proximal limb bones that accompanied swimming in rowing ancestors, facilitating a shift from tubular to flattened limbs. Moreover, the control of flapping movements appears related primarily to shifts in the activity of a single forelimb muscle, the deltoid. Despite some performance advantages, flapping may entail a locomotor cost in terms of decreased locomotor stability. However, other morphological specializations among rowing species may enhance swimming stability. For example, among highly aquatic pleurodiran turtles, fusion of the pelvis to the shell appears to dramatically reduce motions of the pelvis compared to freshwater cryptodiran species. This could contribute to advantageous increases in aquatic stability among predominantly aquatic pleurodires. Thus, even within the potential constraints of a body plan in which the body is encased by a shell, turtles exhibit diverse locomotor capacities that have enabled diversification into a wide range of aquatic habitats.

show abstract

Further Data on Sesamoid Identity from Two Anuran Species

Vera

Ponssa

Abdala

2015

The Anatomical Record

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Considering that the identification of equivalent entities is the basis for any comparative analysis, we compare the histology, histochemistry, shape and dimensions of epiphyses, carpal and sesamoids in two anuran frogs. Our goal was to explore the morphological correspondence among these three skeletal elements in order to clarify the sesamoid identity. We studied the skeletogenesis, contour geometric morphometry and dimensions of forelimb elements of juveniles of two anurans species Leptodactylus bufonius and Rhinella arenarum. Skeletogenesis in anurans present a common trait between carpals and sesamoids: both elements exhibit endochondral ossification. A difference between these elements is the presence of fibrocartilage in the development of sesamoids. The geometric morphometry does not allow us to establish a shape pattern that can be compared either between sesamoids and epiphyses or carpals. With regard to dimensions, our data indicate that bones categorization based on these aspects is ambiguous and therefore is useless to classify of skeletal bones. The data about tissue differentiation of sesamoids provide evidence that support the idea that these elements should be considered part of the typical endowment of the vertebrate skeleton. Anat Rec, 298:1376Rec, 298: -1394Rec, 298: , 2015. V C 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

How muscles accommodate movement in different physical environments: aquatic vs. terrestrial locomotion in vertebrates

Cited by 90 publications

References 36 publications

Environmentally induced mechanical feedback in locomotion: Frog performance as a model

Environmentally induced mechanical feedback in locomotion: Frog performance as a model

“On the Fence” versus “All in”: Insights from Turtles for the Evolution of Aquatic Locomotor Specializations and Habitat Transitions in Tetrapod Vertebrates

Further Data on Sesamoid Identity from Two Anuran Species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About