Cited by 8High Altitude and HypoxiaPhysiological and biochemical adaptationsCardiovascular and exercise physiology

Limits to human locomotor performance: phylogenetic origins and comparative perspectives

Dudley, Robert·2001·Journal of Experimental Biology

Abstract

SUMMARY: Studies of human exercise physiology have been conducted from a largely ahistorical perspective. This approach usefully elucidates proximate limits to locomotor performance, but ignores potential sources of biomechanical and physiological variation that derive from adaptation to ancestral environments. Phylogenetic reconstruction suggests that multiple hominoid lineages, including that leading to Homo sapiens, evolved in African highlands at altitudes of 1000–2000m. The evolution of human locomotor physiology therefore occurred under conditions of hypobaric hypoxia. In contrast to present-day humans running on treadmills or exercising in otherwise rectilinear trajectories, ancestral patterns of hominid locomotion probably involved intermittent knuckle-walking over variable terrain, occasional bouts of arboreality and an evolving capacity for bipedalism. All such factors represent potential axes of locomotor variation at present unstudied in extant hominoid taxa. As with humans, hummingbirds evolved in mid-montane contexts but pose an extreme contrast with respect to body size, locomotor mode and metabolic capacity. Substantial biomechanical and physiological challenges are associated with flight in hypobaria. Nonetheless, hummingbird lineages demonstrate a progressive invasion of higher elevations and a remarkable tolerance to hypoxia during hovering. Upregulation of aerobic capacity and parallel resistance to hypoxia may represent coupled evolutionary adaptations to flight under high-altitude conditions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1242/jeb.204.18.3235

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?

  • Trochilid species diversity, with over 320 taxa, is greatest over the altitudinal range of 1500-2500 m.

    “Trochilid species diversity, with over 320 taxa, is greatest over the altitudinal range of 1500-2500 m”

    From The physiology and biomechanics of avian flight at high altitude (2006) · cites this paper as Dudley, 2001

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dudley, R.
Affiliations
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute (PA)
Corresponding author
Dudley, Robert
Venue
Journal of Experimental Biology
Published
2001-09-15
Volume
204
Issue
18
Pages
3235-3240
ISSN
  • 0022-0949 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-9145
OpenAlex
W2165984045
Cited by
8
References
3
Citations by year
2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
0.18
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Smithsonian Digital Repository (Smithsonian Institution) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › High Altitude and Hypoxia
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Physiological and biochemical adaptations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
hominoid evolution, high-altitude adaptation, hypobaric hypoxia, bipedalism, knuckle-walking, arboreality, hummingbirds, hummingbird flight, hypoxia tolerance, cardiorespiratory fitness, comparative physiology
MeSH terms
Altitude, Animals, Birds, Biological Evolution, Flight, Animal, Humans, Locomotion, Phylogeny, Hominidae, Exercise

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