Cited by 90Robotic Locomotion and ControlLower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention

Two explanations for the compliant running paradox: reduced work of bouncing viscera and increased stability in uneven terrain

Open access
Daley, Monica A., Usherwood, James R.·2010·Biology Letters

Abstract

Economy is a central principle for understanding animal locomotion. Yet, compared with theoretical predictions concerning economy, animals run with compliant legs that are energetically costly. Here, we address this apparent paradox, highlighting two factors that predict benefits for compliant gaits: (i) minimizing cost of work associated with bouncing viscera; and (ii) leg control for robust stability in uneven terrain. We show that consideration of the effects of bouncing viscera predicts an energetic optimum for relatively compliant legs. To compare stability in uneven terrain, we introduce the normalized maximum drop (NMD), a measure based on simple kinematics, which predicts that compliant legs allow negotiation of relatively larger terrain perturbations without failure. Our model also suggests an inherent trade-off in control of leg retraction velocity ( ω ) for stability: low ω allows higher NMD, reducing fall risk, whereas high ω minimizes peak forces with terrain drops, reducing injury risk. Optimization for one of these factors explicitly limits the other; however, compliant legs relax this trade-off, allowing greater stability by both measures. Our models suggest compromises in leg control for economy and stability that might explain why animals run with compliant legs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsbl.2010.0175

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Somatic afferent stimulation contributes to this entrainment, which can be prevented by blockade of the PB nucleus.

    “Somatic afferent stimulation contributes to this entrainment, which can be prevented by blockade of the PB nucleus (cf Daley and Usherwood 2010; Porterfield 1985; Potts et al. 2005).”

    From Motion sickness: more than nausea and vomiting (2014) · cites this paper as Daley and Usherwood 2010

    The Results and discussion section addresses leg compliance, viscera and stability in uneven terrain. Searches for somatic afferent stimulation, entrainment and PB nucleus blockade found no passage in our copy addressing the attributed claim; no page numbers were provided. (LLM, conf=0.78)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Daley, M. A., & Usherwood, J. R.
Affiliations
Royal Veterinary College (GB)
Corresponding author
Daley, Monica A.
Venue
Biology Letters
Published
2010-03-24
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
418-421
ISSN
  • 1744-9561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1744-957X
OpenAlex
W2102874149
Cited by
90
References
22
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
FWCI
4.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biology Letters (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RVC Research Online (Royal Veterinary College) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Robotic Locomotion and Control
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Keywords
running economy, leg compliance, fall risk, injury risk, peak force, locomotion energetics, Animal locomotion
MeSH terms
Animals, Biomechanical Phenomena, Energy Metabolism, Environment, Extremities, Locomotion, Models, Biological, Viscera

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review