Cited by 120Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsHigh Altitude and Hypoxia

Kinematics of hovering hummingbird flight along simulated and natural elevational gradients

Open access
Altshuler, Douglas L., Dudley, Robert·2003·Journal of Experimental Biology

Abstract

SUMMARY: Hovering flight is one of the most energetically demanding forms of animal locomotion. Despite the cost, hummingbirds regularly hover at high elevations,where flight is doubly challenging because of reduced air density and oxygen availability. We performed three laboratory experiments to examine how air density and oxygen partial pressure influence wingbeat kinematics. In the first study, we experimentally lowered air density but maintained constant oxygen partial pressure. Under these hypodense but normoxic conditions,hummingbirds increased stroke amplitude substantially and increased wingbeat frequency slightly. In the second experiment, we maintained constant air density but decreased oxygen partial pressure. Under these normodense but hypoxic conditions, hummingbirds did not alter stroke amplitude but instead reduced wingbeat frequency until they could no longer generate enough vertical force to offset body weight. In a final combined experiment, we decreased air density but increased oxygen availability, and found that the wingbeat kinematics were unaffected by supplemental oxygen. We also studied hovering and maximally loaded flight performance for 43 hummingbird species distributed along a natural elevational gradient in Peru. During free hovering flight, hummingbirds showed increased stroke amplitude interspecifically at higher elevations, mirroring the intra-individual responses in our first laboratory experiment. During loaded flight,hummingbirds increased both wingbeat frequency and wing stroke amplitude by 19% relative to free-flight values at any given elevation. We conclude that modulation of wing stroke amplitude is a major compensatory mechanism for flight in hypodense or hypobaric environments. By contrast, increases in wingbeat frequency impose substantial metabolic demands, are only elicited transiently and anaerobically, and cannot be used to generate additional sustained lift at high elevations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1242/jeb.00540

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Wingbeat frequency declined as predicted on allometric grounds with body mass but was uncorrelated with elevation.

    “Wingbeat frequency, by contrast, declined as predicted on allometric grounds with body mass but was uncorrelated with elevation.”

    From The physiology and biomechanics of avian flight at high altitude (2006) · cites this paper as Altshuler and Dudley, 2003

  • Stroke amplitude during hovering exhibited a systematic increase among species at higher elevations.

    “Stroke amplitude during hovering exhibited a systematic increase among species at higher elevations”

    From The physiology and biomechanics of avian flight at high altitude (2006) · cites this paper as Altshuler and Dudley, 2003

  • Manipulations of hovering flight in hummingbirds using hypodense helium mixtures under both normoxic and hypoxic conditions revealed that low-density air elicits a systematic increase in stroke amplitude but essentially unchanged wingbeat frequencies.

    “Manipulations of hovering flight in hummingbirds using hypodense helium mixtures under both normoxic and hypoxic conditions (Chai andDudley, 1995, 1996;Altshuler and Dudley, 2003) similarly revealed that low-density air elicits a systematic increase in stroke amplitude but essentially unchanged wingbeat frequencies.”

    From The physiology and biomechanics of avian flight at high altitude (2006) · cites this paper as Altshuler and Dudley, 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Altshuler, D. L., & Dudley, R.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (PA)
Corresponding author
  • Altshuler, Douglas L.
  • Dudley, Robert
Venue
Journal of Experimental Biology
Published
2003-09-15
Volume
206
Issue
18
Pages
3139-3147
ISSN
  • 0022-0949 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9145
OpenAlex
W2128634022
Cited by
120
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
6.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
  • Smithsonian Digital Repository (Smithsonian Institution) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9817138, 0108555)
  • Earthwatch Institute
  • Explorers Club
  • University of Texas at Austin
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Aerospace Engineering › Biomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Physiological and biochemical adaptations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › High Altitude and Hypoxia
Keywords
hummingbird flight, hovering flight, wingbeat kinematics, stroke amplitude, wingbeat frequency, air density, hypobaric conditions, hypoxia, oxygen partial pressure, elevation gradient, interspecific variation, flight energetics
MeSH terms
Air, Altitude, Animals, Biomechanical Phenomena, Birds, Flight, Animal, Oxygen, Partial Pressure, Peru

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