Cited by 30Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsAerospace and Aviation TechnologyFluid dynamics and aerodynamics studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A quantitative comparison of bird and bat wakes

Open access
Johansson, L. Christoffer, Wolf, Marta, Hedenström, Anders·2010·Journal of The Royal Society Interface

Abstract

Qualitative comparison of bird and bat wakes has demonstrated significant differences in the structure of the far wake. Birds have been found to have a unified vortex wake of the two wings, while bats have a more complex wake with gradients in the circulation along the wingspan, and with each wing generating its own vortex structure. Here, we compare quantitative measures of the circulation in the far wake of three bird and one bat species. We find that bats have a significantly stronger normalized circulation of the start vortex than birds. We also find differences in how the circulation develops during the wingbeat as demonstrated by the ratio of the circulation of the dominant start vortex and the total circulation of the same sense. Birds show a more prominent change with changing flight speed and a relatively weaker start vortex at minimum power speed than bats. We also find that bats have a higher normalized wake loading based on the start vortex, indicating higher relative induced drag and therefore less efficient lift generation than birds. Our results thus indicate fundamental differences in the aerodynamics of bird and bat flight that will further our understanding of the evolution of vertebrate flight.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rsif.2008.0541

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. Anderson J. D., 2006, Fundamentals of aerodynamics
  2. 10.1098/rsif.2008.0027 · DOI
  3. 10.1098/rsif.2005.0091 · DOI
  4. 10.1163/157075606778967856 · DOI
  5. 10.1126/science.1142281 · DOI
  6. 10.1242/jeb.012146 · DOI
  7. 10.1242/jeb.018192 · DOI
  8. 10.1126/science.1153019 · DOI
  9. 10.1007/978-3-642-83848-4 · DOI
  10. Pennycuick C. J., 1989, Bird flight performance: a practical calculation manual
  11. 10.1017/S0022112079000422 · DOI
  12. 10.1098/rsif.2007.0215 · DOI
  13. 10.1038/350421a0 · DOI
  14. 10.1242/jeb.00423 · DOI
  15. 10.1242/jeb.007823 · DOI
  16. 10.1159/000109964 · DOI
  17. 10.1088/1748-3182/1/4/S02 · DOI
  18. 10.1038/nature03647 · DOI
  19. 10.1007/s003600050126 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Johansson, L. C., Wolf, M., & Hedenström, A.
Affiliations
Lund University (SE)
Corresponding author
Johansson, L. Christoffer
Venue
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
Published
2009-03-25
Volume
7
Issue
42
Pages
61-66
ISSN
  • 1742-5662 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-5689
OpenAlex
W2130402752
Cited by
30
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
4.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of The Royal Society Interface (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Aerospace and Aviation Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Fluid dynamics and aerodynamics studies
Keywords
bird flight, bat flight, wake vortices, circulation, far wake, wing beat, induced drag, lift generation, flight efficiency, flight speed
MeSH terms
Animals, Birds, Chiroptera, Computer Simulation, Flight, Animal, Models, Biological, Species Specificity, Wings, Animal

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