Walking on five legs: investigating tail use during slow gait in kangaroos and wallabies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pentapedal locomotion is the use of the tail as a fifth leg during the slow gait of kangaroos. Although previous studies have informally noted that some smaller species of macropodines do not engage in pentapedal locomotion, a systematic comparative analysis of tail use during slow gait across a wide range of species in this group has not been done. Analysis of relative movement of the pelvis, tail, and joint angles of the lower limbs during slow gait, using 2D landmark techniques on video recordings, was carried out on 16 species of Macropodinae. We also compared the relative lengthening of the tibia using crural index (CI) to test whether hindlimb morphology was associated with pentapedal locomotion. Pentapedal locomotion was characterised by three features: the presence of the ‘tail repositioning phase’, the constant height of the pelvis and the stationary placement of the distal tail on the ground during the hindlimb swing phase. The mean CI of pentapedal species was significantly greater than that of non-pentapedal species (1.71 versus 1.36; P < 0.001). This lends support to the hypothesis that the use of pentapedal locomotion is associated with the relative lengthening of the hindlimb, which in turn is associated with body size and habitat preference within the Macropodinae.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".