Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38467620›Full record

ArticleNature communications2024

Dynamic similarity and the peculiar allometry of maximum running speed.

David Labonte, Peter J Bishop, Taylor J M Dick, Christofer J Clemente

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
10.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Optimal Gearing of Musculoskeletal Systems.Integrative and comparative biology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

David LabonteDepartment of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London, UK. d.labonte@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-1952-8732
Peter J BishopMuseum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Taylor J M DickSchool of Biomedical Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7662-9716
Christofer J ClementeSchool of Biomedical Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8174-3890
The University of Queensland · AUHarvard University · USImperial College London · GB

Funding

EC | EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation H2020 | H2020 Priority Excellent Science | H2020 European Research Council (H2020 Excellent Science - European Research Council) 851705Human Frontier Science Program (HFSP) RGY0073/2020
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animal performance fundamentally influences behaviour, ecology, and evolution. It typically varies monotonously with size. A notable exception is maximum running speed; the fastest animals are of intermediate size. Here we show that this peculiar allometry results from the competition between two musculoskeletal constraints: the kinetic energy capacity, which dominates in small animals, and the work capacity, which reigns supreme in large animals. The ratio of both capacities defines the physiological similarity index Γ, a dimensionless number akin to the Reynolds number in fluid mechanics. The scaling of Γ indicates a transition from a dominance of muscle forces to a dominance of inertial forces as animals grow in size; its magnitude defines conditions of "dynamic similarity" that enable comparison and estimates of locomotor performance across extant and extinct animals; and the physical parameters that define it highlight opportunities for adaptations in musculoskeletal "design" that depart from the eternal null hypothesis of geometric similarity. The physiological similarity index challenges the Froude number as prevailing dynamic similarity condition, reveals that the differential growth of muscle and weight forces central to classic scaling theory is of secondary importance for the majority of terrestrial animals, and suggests avenues for comparative analyses of locomotor systems.

Indexed as

RunningAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaMuscles

Identifiers

PMID38467620
PMCPMC10928110
OpenAlexW4392645783

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.