Cited by 119Lower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesRobotic Locomotion and ControlBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biomechanics and energetics of running on uneven terrain

Voloshina, Alexandra S., Ferris, Daniel P.·2015·Journal of Experimental Biology

Abstract

In the natural world, legged animals regularly run across uneven terrain with remarkable ease. To gain understanding of how running on uneven terrain affects the biomechanics and energetics of locomotion, we studied human subjects (N=12) running at 2.3 m s−1 on an uneven terrain treadmill, with up to a 2.5 cm height variation. We hypothesized that running on uneven terrain would show increased energy expenditure, step parameter variability and leg stiffness compared with running on smooth terrain. Subject energy expenditure increased by 5% (0.68 W kg−1; P<0.05) when running on uneven terrain compared with smooth terrain. Step width and length variability also increased by 27% and 26%, respectively (P<0.05). Positive and negative ankle work decreased on uneven terrain by 22% (0.413 J kg−1) and 18% (0.147 J kg−1), respectively (P=0.0001 and P=0.0008). Mean muscle activity increased on uneven terrain for three muscles in the thigh (P<0.05). Leg stiffness also increased by 20% (P<0.05) during running on uneven terrain compared with smooth terrain. Calculations of gravitational potential energy fluctuations suggest that about half of the energetic increases can be explained by additional positive and negative mechanical work for up and down steps on the uneven surface. This is consistent between walking and running, as the absolute increases in energetic cost for walking and running on uneven terrain were similar: 0.68 and 0.48 W kg−1, respectively. These results provide insight into how surface smoothness can affect locomotion biomechanics and energetics in the real world.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1242/jeb.106518

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Voloshina, A. S., & Ferris, D. P.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Voloshina, Alexandra S.
Venue
Journal of Experimental Biology
Published
2015-03-01
Volume
218
Issue
5
Pages
711-719
ISSN
  • 0022-0949 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9145
OpenAlex
W4256243664
Cited by
119
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Experimental Biology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robotic Locomotion and Control
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Keywords
locomotion energetics, energy expenditure, step variability, leg stiffness, muscle activity, gravitational potential energy, surface smoothness, treadmill running

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