MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2127991878 · doi:10.1242/jeb.01522

Testing the hindlimb-strength hypothesis: non-aerial locomotion by Chiroptera is not constrained by the dimensions of the femur or tibia

2005· article· en· W2127991878 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel K. Riskin, John E. A. Bertram, John W. Hermanson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHindlimbDesmodus rotundusCrawlingBiologyAnatomyFemurTibiaQuadrupedalismTerrestrial locomotionPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the evolution of flight bats appear to have suffered a trade-off; they have become poor crawlers relative to terrestrial mammals. Capable walking does occur in a few disparate taxa, including the vampire bats, but the vast majority of bats are able only to shuffle awkwardly along the ground, and the morphological bases of differences in crawling ability are not currently understood. One widely cited hypothesis suggests that the femora of most bats are too weak to withstand the compressive forces that occur during terrestrial locomotion, and that the vampire bats can walk because they possess more robust hindlimb skeletons. We tested a prediction of the hindlimb-strength hypothesis: that during locomotion, the forces produced by the hindlimbs of vampire bats should be larger than those produced by the legs of poorly crawling bats. Using force plates we compared the hindlimb forces produced by two species of vampire bats that walk well, Desmodus rotundus (N=8) and Diaemus youngi (N=2), to the hindlimb forces produced during over-ground shuffling by a similarly sized bat that is a poor walker (Pteronotus parnellii; N=6). Peak hindlimb forces produced by P. parnellii were larger (ANOVA; P<0.05; N=65) and more variable (93.5+/-36.6% body weight, mean +/- s.d.) than those of D. rotundus (69.3+/-8.1%) or D. youngi (75.0+/-6.2%). Interestingly, the vertical components of peak force were equivalent among species (P>0.6), indicating similar roles for support of body weight by the hindlimbs in the three species. We also used a simple engineering model of bending stress to evaluate the support capabilities of the hindlimb skeleton from the dimensions of 113 museum specimens in 50 species. We found that the hindlimb bones of vampires are not built to withstand larger forces than those of species that crawl poorly. Our results show that the legs of poorly crawling bats should be able to withstand the forces produced during coordinated crawling of the type used by the agile vampires, and this indicates that some mechanism other than hindlimb bone thickness, such as myology of the pectoral girdle, limits the ability of most bats to crawl.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations49
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Experimental BiologySame topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207