Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35646881›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Competing Models of Work in Quadrupedal Walking: Center of Mass Work is Insufficient to Explain Stereotypical Gait.

Delyle T Polet, John E A Bertram

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Delyle T PoletBiological Sciences, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
John E A BertramCell Biology and Anatomy, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The walking gaits of cursorial quadrupedal mammals tend to be highly stereotyped as a four-beat pattern with interspersed periods of double and triple stance, often with double-hump ground reaction force profiles. This pattern has long been associated with high energetic economy, due to low apparent work. However, there are differing ways of approximating the work performed during walking and, consequently, different interpretations of the primary mechanism leading to high economy. A focus on Net Center of Mass (COM) Work led to the claim that quadrupedal walking is efficient because it effectively trades potential and kinetic energy of the COM. Individual Limbs COM Work instead focuses on the ability of the limbs to manage the trajectory of the COM to limit energetic losses to the ground ("collisions"). By focusing on the COM, both these metrics effectively dismiss the importance of rotation of the elongate quadrupedal body. Limb Extension Work considers work required to extend and contract each limb like a strut, and accounts for the work of body pitching. We tested the prescriptive ability of these approximations of work by optimizing them within a quadrupedal model with two approximations of the body as a point-mass or a rigid distributed mass. Perfect potential-kinetic energy exchange of the COM was possible when optimizing Net COM Work, resulting in highly compliant gaits with duty factors close to one, far different than observed mammalian gaits. Optimizing Individual Limbs COM Work resulted in alternating periods of single limb stance. Only the distributed mass model, with Limb Extension Work as the cost, resulted in a solution similar to the stereotypical mammalian gait. These results suggest that maintaining a near-constant limb length, with distributed contacts, are more important mechanisms of economy than either transduction of potential-kinetic energy or COM collision mitigation for quadrupedal walking.

Indexed as

mammalpendular recoveryquadrupedal modeltrajectory optimizationwork minimization

Identifiers

PMID35646881
PMCPMC9135023

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.