z-logo
Premium
Stand and shuffle: When does it make energetic sense?
Author(s) -
Sylvester Adam D.,
Kramer Patricia A.
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
american journal of physical anthropology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.146
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1096-8644
pISSN - 0002-9483
DOI - 10.1002/ajpa.20752
Subject(s) - bipedalism , shuffling , quadrupedalism , traverse , raising (metalworking) , computer science , biology , mathematics , geometry , anatomy , geography , geodesy , programming language
Many reasons for the emergence of bipedalism have been proposed, including postural arguments which highlight that a sub‐optimal form of bipedalism (“shuffling”) might have been used by protohominids to cover short distances between resources that require bipedal standing. Bipedal shuffling may have been employed because it avoids the cost of raising the trunk from the quadrupedal orientation, which we assume is the habitual locomotor stance of protohominids. To date, these postural proposals have not been analytically assessed, a lack we rectify herein. Our model seeks to specify a threshold distance, below which bipedal shuffling uses less energy than quadrupedalism. Parameters for the model include the mechanical cost of transport, the ratio of bipedal to quadrupedal cost, and the cost associated with raising the trunk. We found that, using reasonable model parameters, open distances of ∼9–16 m support the use of bipedal shuffling. Protohominids may have used shuffling as an energetically effective way to traverse between resource patches. Am J Phys Anthropol, 2008. © 2007 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here