4.5 Article

Geckos decouple fore- and hind limb kinematics in response to changes in incline

Journal

FRONTIERS IN ZOOLOGY
Volume 13, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12983-016-0144-2

Keywords

Gecko; Incline; Decline; Adhesive system; Forelimb; Hind limb

Categories

Funding

  1. NSF [NSF IOS-1147043]
  2. Direct For Biological Sciences [1147043] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  3. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [1147043] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Terrestrial animals regularly move up and down surfaces in their natural habitat, and the impacts of moving uphill on locomotion are commonly examined. However, if an animal goes up, it must go down. Many morphological features enhance locomotion on inclined surfaces, including adhesive systems among geckos. Despite this, it is not known whether the employment of the adhesive system results in altered locomotor kinematics due to the stereotyped motions that are necessary to engage and disengage the system. Using a generalist pad-bearing gecko, Chondrodactylus bibronii, we determined whether changes in slope impact body and limb kinematics. Results: Despite the change in demand, geckos did not change speed on any incline. This constant speed was achieved by adjusting stride frequency, step length and swing time. Hind limb, but not forelimb, kinematics were altered on steep downhill conditions, thus resulting in significant de-coupling of the limbs. Conclusions: Unlike other animals on non-level conditions, the geckos in our study only minimally alter the movements of distal limb elements, which is likely due to the constraints associated with the need for rapid attachment and detachment of the adhesive system. This suggests that geckos may experience a trade-off between successful adhesion and the ability to respond dynamically to locomotor perturbations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available