Differential scaling of locomotor performance in small and large terrestrial mammals
Departamento de Ciencias Ecológicas, Facultad de Ciencias,
Universidad de Chile, Casilla 653, Santiago, Chile
Present address: Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown
University, Providence, RI 02912, USA
(e-mail: jose_iriarte{at}brown.edu)
Accepted 10 June 2002
![]() |
Summary |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: body length, body size, locomotion, mammal, running speed, scaling
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Based on geometric similarity models, maximum running speed has been
predicted to be independent of body size
(Hill, 1950;
McMahon, 1975a
). Other
similarity models (i.e. elastic, static stress and dynamic similarity) predict
that running speed must increase in larger animals (see
Garland, 1983
). Alternatively,
it has been proposed that the relationship between body mass
(Mb) and running speed is simpler and more intuitive than
these similarity models imply. Biomechanical models predict a positive
relationship between limb length and body size (see
Losos, 1990b
), which has been
observed empirically in lizards (Garland
and Losos, 1994
and references therein). However, in a study on
mammal running speeds, Garland
(1983
) showed that the
relationship between maximum running speed and Mb was
curvilinear rather than linear. After analysing the relationship within
taxonomic groups, he found that orders containing the largest animals (i.e.
Artiodactyla and Carnivora) showed negative or mass-independent scaling
exponents, while orders of small animals (i.e. Rodentia, Lagomorpha) had
mass-independent or positive relationships. A similar pattern was found in
skeletal allometry of the limb long bones in mammals, where small and large
body-sized groups yielded different scaling exponents
(McMahon, 1975b
;
Alexander, 1977
; Alexander et
al., 1977
,
1979
;
Biewener, 1983a
). Economos
(1983
) and Bou and Casinos
(1985
) suggested that the
different results could be explained by a differential scaling of the long
bones of large versus small-sized mammals owing to the greater
effects of gravity on the larger animals
(Biewener, 1990
). Differential
scaling of morphological characters, including bone length and width
(Bertram and Biewener, 1990
;
Christiansen, 1999
), bone
curvature (Bertram and Biewener,
1992
) and body length
(Economos, 1983
), and of
ecological characteristics (e.g. Silva and
Downing, 1995
; Marquet and
Taper, 1998
), have been described previously.
Several studies have shown that bone properties are extremely conservative
regardless of phylogenetic and mass considerations
(Biewener, 1990 and references
therein). Among mammals, compressive failure strength ranges from 180 to 220
MPa (Biewener, 1990
), and
ultimate bending strength ranges from 170 to 300 MPa
(Biewener, 1982
). If mammals
were designed according to geometric similarity, the static pressure stress
(force per area) should increase in proportion to
Mb0.28 (see
Biewener, 1982
), indicating
that the ratio of failure stress (i.e. mechanical strength) to static stress
should decrease as Mb increases. If we assume that peak
locomotor forces exerted on the ground are constant multiples of
Mb, then peak locomotor stresses should scale with
Mb in the same way as static stress. However, in
vivo measurements of bone strain
(Biewener and Taylor, 1986
;
Biewener et al., 1988
;
Rubin and Lanyon, 1984
;
Taylor, 1985
), and
calculations of bone stress from force platforms using high speed cameras
(Alexander and Vernon, 1975
;
Alexander et al., 1984
;
Biewener, 1983b
;
Biewener and Blickhan, 1988
),
in different sized terrestrial species during strenuous activities, such as
running or jumping, indicate that, rather than increasing with
Mb, peak bone stress is mass-independent. Thus, the ratio
of peak locomotor bone stress and static bone stress, defined as stress scope,
which indicates how much stress can be resisted by a loaded bone, would
decrease in proportion to Mb-0.28 and
Mb-0.27, for compressive and bending stress,
respectively. Experimental measurements of limb bone stress in a variety of
mammals during locomotion have shown that, within each gait, the forces
applied over bones increase proportionally with speed
(Biewener, 1983b
;
Biewener and Taylor, 1986
;
Biewener et al., 1988
). Farley
and Taylor (1991
) showed that
the transition from trot to gallop in horses occurs at the same level of peak
stress on muscles and tendons, suggesting that the gait transition might be
triggered when musculoskeletal forces reach a critical level as a mechanism to
reduce the chance of injury. It has been shown that maximum running speed
recorded during gallop reaches similar peak bone stress values to those
observed during the trot-gallop transition
(Biewener and Taylor, 1986
),
indicating that those animals with greater stress scope values should be able
to attain greater speeds than animals with a lower stress scope.
Locomotor performance has been considered an `ecologically relevant' trait
because of its effect on an animal's ability to escape from predators or to
catch prey (Huey and Stevenson,
1979). However, when we wish to compare locomotor performance
among organisms of different body size we are confronted with the problem of
scale because body size affects nearly all physiological functions
(Schmidt-Nielsen, 1984
).
Therefore, because (1) the amount that an animal's muscle shortens, and (2)
the distance travelled with one step, both vary directly with body length, a
body length-dependent scale (relative running speed) might be more appropriate
when characterising the performance of animals
(Jones and Lindstedt, 1993
).
Accordingly, through a computer simulation, Van Damme and Van Dooren
(1999
) showed that animals
with higher relative speeds (in body length s-1) would be less
likely to be caught than relatively slower animals, and that the relationship
between running speed and catchability might be size dependent. Therefore, a
relative measurement of performance might be an important factor that would
predict the outcome of a predator-prey interaction.
In this paper, I analysed the effect of body weight on a length-dependent measurement of maximum locomotor performance in terrestrial mammals. Based on the geometric similarity model, the relative running speed should scale as Mb-0.33. Alternatively, if relative speed scales with limb length according to biomechanical predictions, the relationship should be mass independent. It is hypothesised that gravity would be playing a differential role on locomotor performance across different size ranges, and large species would be more affected than small ones. Therefore, it is expected that small mammals would show an allometric exponent similar to that predicted by either geometric similarity or biomechanical analysis. In contrast, if locomotor performance in large mammals is constrained by the ability of musculoskeletal structures to withstand forces during activity, it is expected that absolute maximum running speed would be proportional to stress scope and therefore would scale according to Mb-0.27. Consequently, a length-based measurement of performance would scale in proportion to Mb-0.60. On the other hand, if locomotor performance was not constrained by body weight, a monotonic relationship between maximum relative speed and body mass should be observed in all ranges of body mass. In order to test this hypothesis, I worked with a sample spanning a wide range of body sizes as well as taxonomic groups, analysing the differences in patterns observed between large and small-sized mammals.
![]() |
Materials and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
Data on body length (Lb), measured as the length of the
head and body (excluding tail length), were obtained mainly from Eisenberg
(1981) and Nowak
(1999
). Data reported
correspond to mean values for adult individuals. If mean values were
unavailable, the midpoint of ranges was used. Where specific values were
unavailable, values were obtained from Silva's
(1998
) allometric equation for
terrestrial non-flying mammals Lb=0.330
Mb0.334 (r2=0.98).
An estimation of bending stress scope for mammals analysed in this study
was obtained using the equation
![]() | (1) |
Statistical analysis
The relationship between Mb and maximum relative speed
(Vmax/Lb) was obtained through linear
regression on log-transformed data to yield estimates of the parameters of the
allometric equation
![]() | (2) |
Non-linearity in the relationship between maximum relative running speed
and Mb was suggested by the LOWESS method (robust
locally weighted scatterplot smoother;
Cleveland, 1979), a
non-parametric technique of sequential smoothing that does not attempt to fit
a simple model over the entire range of data, but fits a series of local
regression curves using restricted sets of data near the area of interest
(Efron and Tibshirani, 1991
).
This procedure is used for revealing distribution patterns that are difficult
to identify in a scatterplot (Ellison,
1993
). I used polynomial regression analysis to test for
statistical significance of non-linearity indicated by LOWESS. Differential
scaling can be modelled by a continuous linear relationship with different
slopes on either side of a critical point (k), generating a broken
line. If there is only one critical point, there will be two domains with
their own linear regressions (bilinear model). If there are two critical
points, three domains will appear (trilinear model). Comparisons between
regression models were conducted by comparing the resulting Error Mean Squares
under the different models (polynomial, bilinear, and trilinear) to calculate
the F-statistic from their ratio and applying the sequential
Bonferroni test using the
Dunn
idák method to avoid
inflating the type I error (Sokal and
Rohlf, 1995
). This approach was used rather than comparing
coefficients of determination because it considers the reduction in degree of
freedom by fitting additional parameters to the regression model.
Comparisons of estimated slopes with slopes obtained from the literature
were made by t-test. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to test
the equality of slopes of different taxa or size ranges. When more than two
slopes were compared, multiple comparisons of slopes were carried out through
a Bonferroni test (Zar, 1996).
All analyses were made with
=0.05.
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
|
When plotted against stress scope, maximum relative speed showed a similar pattern to that observed against body mass. The group of small-sized mammals showed a significant positive correlation between these traits (r=0.548; P<0.01; Fig. 2A), and the group of large mammals showed an even stronger correlation (r=0.803; P<0.001; Fig. 2B).
|
Separate analyses on taxonomic groups for which adequate data sets were
available (N7) suggested more negative scaling exponents in large
body-sized orders of mammals than in small body-sized ones (see
Table 3). There were
differences in allometric exponents among the best represented taxonomic
groups: Artiodactyla, Carnivora and Rodentia (ANCOVA, P<0.01). The
slope of Artiodactyla differed significantly from that of Rodentia (Bonferroni
test, P<0.05). Consistently, the allometric exponent of Carnivora,
an intermediate body sized group (2.5-265 kg), was intermediate between that
of Artiodactyla and Rodentia, and did not differ significantly from them
(Bonferroni test, P>0.05; Table
3; power, 0.870 and 0.369, respectively). The only slope that did
not differ significantly from zero was that of lagomorphs, while the scaling
exponents of rodents and marsupials proved to be slightly less than zero.
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Three domains (small, intermediate and large-sized mammals), each with different scaling exponents, were identified through LOWESS analysis. This may be reflecting a pattern of two extreme regimes with different slopes and a transitional zone of gradual exponent change, although it needs to be considered in terms of the taxa that comprise this zone in order to evaluate potentially evolutionary or taxonomic effects (see below). In this particular case, these domains may be modelled by gravitational effect over organisms. For simplification, the data set was modelled as if there were only two domains with one critical or break point distinguishing small and large-sized mammals. This model yielded a similar fit to the two-point change model, but makes interpretations easier. There was no difference between scaling exponents of mammals below 10 and 30 kg, and between mammals above 30 and 100 kg. The power analyses showed very low values (approx. 0.1) for these comparisons, but these should be considered cautiously. The values obtained from retrospective power analysis are dependent on the observed differences between treatments, so if the difference is close to zero, the power of the test will be extremely low. In this case, the differences observed in slope between below 10 and 30 kg groups and above 30 and 100 kg groups and the associated errors are small. Besides, the differences between the large groups and between the small-sized groups using the different models are also small in terms of number of species. For example, the below 30 kg and below 10 kg groups differed in only seven species, yielding, as expected, few differences in the estimated slopes. This would indicate that the distinction between two or three domains would have no effects on parameter estimation.
The scaling exponent of small-sized mammals (below 30 kg) did not differ
from that which would be expected under elastic similarity
(Mb-0.08;
McMahon, 1975a). However, Bou
et al. (1987
) reported a
significantly different allometric exponent for the limb bones dimensions
(diameter and length) of rodents and insectivores from those expected under
elastic similarity, mainly due to limb adaptations to their habitat (e.g.
fossorial and arboreal mammals). On the other hand, linear dimensions in large
mammals scale to Mb in agreement with elastic or static
stress similarity, depending on the range of Mb analysed
(Prothero and Sereno, 1982
;
Bertram and Biewener, 1990
;
Biewener, 1990
). However, in
this study it was found that the scaling exponent of relative locomotor
performance of large mammals cannot be predicted by any particular similarity
model, although geometric similarity is the model that predicts the closer
exponent (b=-0.33).
The discrepancies between morphological and speed scaling, as noted by
Günther (1975), show that
there is no single criterion that provides a satisfactory explanation for
qualitatively different characters such as limb proportions and locomotor
performance. Furthermore, the non-correspondence between morphology and
performance based on expectations from similarity models might be due to a
lack of knowledge of the factors that contribute towards determining maximum
locomotor performance. Predictions obtained might be based on erroneous
assumptions yielding spurious results. For example, predicted values of
scaling exponents from geometric similarity are derived from the assumption
that absolute maximum performance is determined by maximum mechanical power
developed by limb muscles (for derivation, see
McMahon, 1975a
). However,
among lizards, some evidence has been gathered suggesting that the mechanical
power developed by limb muscles is not a determinant of maximum running speed
(Farley, 1997
). Also, the
absence of correlation between power output and running speed might be a
mass-dependent phenomenon of this methodology, where larger lizards would be
more affected in their performance by mechanical power output, as Farley
(1997
) pointed out. In
addition, other factors could be affecting maximum locomotor performance, such
as muscle energetics, neuromuscular coordination, dynamic constraints and
efficiency (for a review, see Jones and
Lindstedt, 1993
). There is some evidence suggesting that
mechanical impositions over musculoskeletal structures could be constraining
locomotor performance (Biewener,
1990
), although this hypothesis has not been tested directly.
The steeper reduction in locomotor performance with increasing
Mb in large mammals observed in this study is consistent
with the hypothesis of differential scaling between large and small-sized
species, and it could be explained to occur as a result of mechanical
constraints imposed on the skeletal structure, as pointed out by Biewener
(1990). If mammals scale
following geometric similarity, bone peak stress would increase faster than
the ability to resist it, making organisms mechanically unviable over
determined Mb
(Biewener, 1990
).
Fariña et al. (1997
),
in an allometric study of bending resistance of long bones of birds, mammals
and dinosaurs, showed that the ability of limb bones to withstand forces
decreases with Mb. This is in agreement with previous
laboratory studies that reported that small mammals can resist more gravity
than large ones (Economos,
1981
). Nevertheless, it has been observed that mammals keep
relatively constant values of safety factors (i.e. the ratio between the
bone's failure stress and stress experienced during functional activities;
Alexander, 1981
) in a wide
range of Mb (Biewener,
1990
and references therein). Thus, as Mb
increases, mammals must carry out several postural, morphologic, and
behavioural modifications in order to keep the structural integrity of the
skeletal support, such as more upright postures (Biewener,
1983a
,
1989
), more robust skeletons
in larger organisms (Bertram and Biewener,
1990
; Christiansen,
1999
) and reductions in locomotor performance
(Biewener, 1990
). This is
noted in the correlation between relative performance and stress scope, where
very large mammals (i.e. those having very low stress scope values within the
large mammal group) show little variation around the regression line. This
variation, however, increases concomitantly with stress scope, in agreement
with the idea that very large species are more restricted in their performance
by mechanical constraints over support structures than smaller species.
Nevertheless, when the group of small-sized species is analysed, correlation
between stress scope and performance becomes weaker, showing great variation
around the regression line, apparently independent of stress scope, which may
be the product of factors other than Mb, such as
morphological adaptations to habitat and modes of locomotion
(Bou et al., 1987
;
Garland et al., 1988
).
Locomotor performance in large mammals is more highly correlated with
Mb and stress scope than in small ones (see
Fig. 2). The small amount of
variation around the regression line could reflect the fact that almost all
mammals above 10 kg are `cursorial' (sensu
Alexander and Jayes, 1983),
which means that they stand and run with the femur and humerus upright and
have conservative locomotor modes (Bertram
and Biewener, 1990
). In addition, it has been noted that the
values of speed tend to be independent of locomotor adaptations as
Mb increases (Bou et
al., 1987
). Thus, Mb alone could be
responsible for the variation in locomotor performance.
In regression analyses within restricted taxonomic groups, Perissodactyla and Artiodactyla, the largest groups of mammals analysed, showed the highest allometric exponents (see Table 3). Both exponents were not different from those previously described for large mammals overall (over 30 kg), suggesting that exponent estimation does not seem to be affected when phylogenetic relationships among species included in the analyses are taken into account. The low retrospective power of these tests (0.168 and 0.418, respectively) seems to be a product of the small differences in slope estimations between the groups rather than an actual low power of test, at least in the case of artiodactyls. For perisodactyls, the slope estimation would not be reliable due to the large error associate caused by the small sample size (N=7). Artiodactyls possess a greater scaling exponent than the small-sized group Rodentia, whereas the medium-sized Carnivora have an intermediate exponent, although this value is not significantly different from that of large and small-sized taxonomic groups. However, the value of this exponent should be considered cautiously. The group of carnivores has the smallest sample size and the greatest error estimates when compared to rodents and artiodactyls, and would be expected to have the least sensitivity to the differences in slope. Moreover, Carnivora is the only well-represented group that is present on both sides of critical point. In residual analysis, the carnivores of the small mammals group are evenly distributed throughout the regression line (Fig. 3A), whereas all the large-sized carnivores (except one, the cheetah) are grouped as negative residuals (Fig. 3B). This pattern is explained by the fact that small and large-sized carnivores do not follow a monotonic relationship with Mb, but have a differential scaling as observed in the pooled-sample of all mammals (nearly mass independent in small species, and strongly negative in large ones). Therefore, the observed scaling exponent of Carnivora would be spurious.
|
Lagomorpha is a group of species with fast running speeds and spanning a narrow body mass range. All species in this group fall above the regression line of the pooled small-sized mammals (Fig. 3A), generating a high leverage over parameter estimation. When lagomorphs are excluded from the analysis, the regression slope becomes steeper, but still significantly different from that of rodents (P<0.05).
The differential scaling observed in mammals would have ecological
implications also. Small mammals are commonly prey for animals that use
surprise attacks as hunting techniques (e.g. raptors, snakes, and felines). In
these cases, the predators are usually bigger and faster (in absolute terms)
than the prey, which escape by running to a suitable refuge. In this type of
predation technique, where the attacks are quick and discrete, the success of
an attack might be dependent of the size of the prey. It is intuitively
logical that in a choice between two prey of different size moving at the same
absolute speed, the predator has more chance if it chases the larger one, as
shown by Van Damme and Van Dooren
(1999). Another important
factor in predatorprey interactions is the manoeuvrability of the
organism. Many animals are able to escape a predator that is, in absolute
terms, faster, thanks to the ability to make a tighter turn than predator.
This escape strategy, called the `turning gambit' (sensu
Howland, 1974
), has been
observed in different species spanning from small moths to large mammals. The
turning gambit has been shown to be a size-dependent characteristic
(Webb, 1976
;
Witter et al., 1994
;
Domenici, 2001
), but few works
have evaluated the effect of shape and size of the body on turning performance
in terrestrial vertebrates (Eilam,
1994
; Carrier et al.,
2001
; Lee et al.,
2001
). Turning performance is dependent on the rotational inertia
of the body (i.e. the sum of differential elements of mass multiplied by the
square of the perpendicular distance from the axis of rotation) and,
therefore, larger animals should have a higher rotational inertia and a poorer
turning performance than smaller ones. This work shows that the largest
species of the small-sized group should be more susceptible to predation
because of their reduced relative performance and reduced manoeuvrability.
According to this, Hedenström and Rosén
(2001
) suggested that
selection of large-sized prey by sparrowhawks over small-sized ones could be
due to the higher manoeuvrability of the latter; it could also be an
energy-based decision, because larger prey are more profitable.
On the other hand, large mammals are chased by large predators (e.g. lions)
using maintained persecutions (Emerson et
al., 1994). In this type of hunting, the absolute running speed
seems to be more important in determining the success of an attack. However,
manoeuvrability plays an important role in the escape strategy of prey and as
pointed out above, this depends on body length. The poor performance (absolute
and relative) observed in large mammals indicates that they would be easily
susceptible to individual predation. Thus, the life in groups observed in some
large mammals (e.g. some artiodactyls) has been explained as an antipredation
protective mechanism (Jarman and Jarman, 1979) in order to compensate their
poor running ability. Some morphological adaptations to rapid locomotion in
some large species of mammals have been described
(Taylor et al., 1971
;
Lindstedt et al., 1991), but these adaptations might be a secondary
acquisition, where the initial selection would be the reduction in transport
costs and the increase of home range
(Janis and Wilhelm, 1993
). The
strong diminution in relative performance as Mb increases
in large mammals supports the idea that running speed, either absolute or
relative, has not been a selected characteristic in mammalian evolution.
This study showed that an analysis of scaling of maximum locomotor
performance over a broad range of Mb might yield spurious
results. As observed in several traits, the relationship between maximum
locomotor performance and body size changes depending on the range of
Mb studied. Locomotor performance of small mammals seems
to be nearly independent of Mb, which agrees with previous
studies conducted in rodents (Garland,
1983; Djawdan and Garland,
1988
; Garland et al.,
1988
). However, when large-sized mammal species are analysed, the
relationship between relative locomotor performance and Mb
becomes more negative. The reduction in locomotor performance in large mammals
is consistent with the hypothesis of mechanical constraints and may be
understood as a stress reduction mechanism. Nevertheless, despite the fact
that this idea had been mentioned previously in the literature
(Garland, 1983
;
Biewener, 1990
), it has not
been tested.
![]() |
Acknowledgments |
---|
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Alexander, R. McN. (1977). Allometry of the limbs of antelopes (Bovidae). J. Zool. Lond. 183,125 -146.
Alexander, R. McN. (1981). Factors of safety in the structure of animals. Sci. Prog. 67,109 -130.[Medline]
Alexander, R. McN. and Jayes, A. S. (1983). A dynamic similarity hypothesis for the gaits of quadrupedal mammals. J. Zool. Lond. 201,135 -152.
Alexander, R. McN. and Vernon, A. (1975). The mechanics of hopping by kangaroos (Macropodidae). J. Zool. Lond. 177,265 -303.
Alexander, R. McN., Brandwood, A., Currey, J. D. and Jayes, A. S. (1984). Symmetry and precision of control of strength in limb bones of birds. J. Zool. Lond. 203,135 -143.
Alexander, R. McN., Jayes, A. S., Maloiy, G. M. O. and Wathuta, E. M. (1979). Allometry of the limb bones of Mammals from shrews (Sorex) to elephant (Loxodonta). J. Zool. Lond. 189,305 -314.
Alexander, R. McN., Langman, V. A. and Jayes, A. S. (1977). Fast locomotion of some African ungulates. J. Zool. Lond. 183,291 -300.
Bauwens, D., Garland, T., Jr, Castilla, A. M. and Van Damme, R. (1995). Evolution of sprint speed in lacertid lizards: morphological, physiological, and behavioral covariation. Evolution 49,848 -863.
Bertram, J. E. A. and Biewener, A. A. (1990). Differential scaling of the long bones in the terrestrial Carnivora and other mammals. J. Morphol. 204,157 -169.[Medline]
Bertram, J. E. A. and Biewener, A. A. (1992). Allometry and curvature in the long bones of quadrupedal mammals. J. Zool. Lond. 226,455 -467.
Biewener, A. A. (1982). Bone strength in small mammals and bipedal birds: do safety factors change with body size? J. Exp. Biol. 98,289 -301.[Abstract]
Biewener, A. A. (1983a). Allometry of quadrupedal locomotion: the scaling of duty factor, bone curvature and limb orientation to body size. J. Exp. Biol. 105,147 -171.[Abstract]
Biewener, A. A. (1983b). Locomotory stresses in the hind limb bones of two small mammals: the ground squirrel and chipmunk. J. Exp. Biol. 103,131 -154.[Abstract]
Biewener, A. A. (1989). Scaling body support in mammals: limb posture and muscle mechanics. Science 245, 45-48.[Medline]
Biewener, A. A. (1990). Biomechanics of mammalian terrestrial locomotion. Science 250,1097 -1103.[Medline]
Biewener, A. A. and Blickhan, R. (1988). Kangaroo rat locomotion: design for elastic energy storage or acceleration? J. Exp. Biol. 140,243 -256.[Abstract]
Biewener, A. A. and Taylor, C. R. (1986). Bone strain: a determinant of gait and speed? J. Exp. Biol. 123,383 -400.[Abstract]
Biewener, A. A., Thomason, J. J. and Lanyon, L. E. (1988). Mechanics of locomotion and jumping in the horse (Equus): in vivo stress in the tibia and metatarsus. J. Zool. Lond. 214,547 -565.
Bonine, K. E. and Garland, T., Jr (1999). Sprint performance of phrynosomatid lizards, measured on a high-speed treadmill, correlates with hind limb length. J. Zool. Lond. 248,255 -265.
Bou, J. and Casinos, A. (1985). Scaling of bone mass to body mass in insectivores and rodents. In Functional Morphology in Vertebrates (ed. H. R. Duncker and G. Fleischer), pp. 61-64. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer Verlag.
Bou, J., Casinos, A. and Ocaña, J. (1987). Allometry of the limb long bones of insectivores and rodents. J. Morphol. 192,113 -123.[Medline]
Carrier, D. R., Walter, R. M. and Lee, D. V.
(2001). Influence of rotational inertia on turning performance of
theropod dinosaurs: clues from humans with increased rotational inertia.
J. Exp. Biol. 204,3917
-3926.
Christiansen, P. (1999). Scaling of mammalian long bones: small and large mammals compared. J. Zool. Lond. 247,333 -348.
Cleveland, W. S. (1979). Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 74,829 -836.
Djawdan, M. (1993). Locomotor performance of bipedal and quadrupedal heteromyid rodents. Funct. Ecol. 7,195 -202.
Djawdan, M. and Garland, T., Jr (1988). Maximal running speeds of bipedal and quadrupedal rodents. J. Mammal. 69,765 -772.
Domenici, P. (2001). The scaling of locomotor performance in predator-prey encounters: from fish to killer whales. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A. 131,169 -182.
Economos, A. C. (1981). The largest land mammal. J. Theor. Biol. 89,211 -215.
Economos, A. C. (1983). Elastic and/or geometric similarity in mammalian design? J. Theor. Biol. 103,167 -172.[Medline]
Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R. (1991). Statistical data analysis in the computer age. Science 253,390 -395.
Eilam, D. (1994). Influence of body morphology on turning behavior in carnivores. J. Motor Behav. 26, 3-12.
Eisenberg, J. F. (1981). The Mammalian Radiations. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Ellison, A. M. (1993). Exploratory data analysis and graphic display. In Design and Analysis of Ecological Experiments (ed. S. M. Scheiner and J. Gurevitch), pp.14 -45. New York: Chapman and Hall, Inc.
Emerson, S. B., Greene, H. W. and Charnov, E. L. (1994). Allometric aspects of predator-prey interactions. In Ecological Morphology: Integrative Organismal Biology (ed. P. C. Wainwright and S. M. Reilly), pp. 123-139. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Fariña, R. A., Vizcaíno, S. and Blanco, E. (1997). Scaling of the indicator of athletic capability in fossil and extant land tetrapods. J. Theor. Biol. 185,441 -446.
Farley, C. T. (1997). Maximum speed and
mechanical power output in lizards. J. Exp. Biol.
200,2189
-2195.
Farley, C. T. and Taylor, C. R. (1991). A mechanical trigger for the trotgallop transition in horses. Science 253,306 -308.[Medline]
Garland, T., Jr (1983). The relation between maximal running speed and body mass in terrestrial mammals. J. Zool. Lond. 199,157 -170.
Garland, T., Jr (1984). Physiological
correlates of locomotory performance in a lizard: an allometric approach.
Am. J. Physiol. 247,R806
-R815.
Garland, T., Jr (1994). Phylogenetic analyses in lizard endurance capacity in relation to body size and body temperature. In Lizard Ecology (ed. L. J. Vitt and E. R. Pianka), pp.237 -260. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Garland, T., Jr and Janis, C. M. (1993). Does metatarsal/femur ratio predict maximal running speed in cursorial mammals? J. Zool. Lond. 229,133 -151.
Garland, T., Jr and Losos, J. B. (1994). Ecological morphology of locomotor performance in squamate reptiles. In Ecological Morphology: Intergrative Organismal Biology (ed. P. C. Wainwright and S. M. Reilly), pp. 240-302. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Garland, T., Jr, Geiser, F. and Baudinette, R. V. (1988). Comparative performance of marsupial and placental mammals. J. Zool. Lond. 215,505 -522.
Günther, B. (1975). Dimensional analysis
and theory of biological similarity. Physiol. Rev.
55,659
-699.
Hedenström, A. and Rosén, M.
(2001). Predator versus prey: on aerial hunting and escape
strategies in birds. Behav. Ecol.
12,150
-156.
Hill, A. V. (1950). The dimensions of animals and their muscular dynamics. Sci. Prog. 38,209 -230.
Howland, H. C. (1974). Optimal strategies for predator avoidance: the relative importance of speed and manoeuvrability. J. Theor. Biol. 47,333 -350.[Medline]
Huey, R. B. and Stevenson, R. D. (1979). Integrating thermal physiology and ecology of ectotherms: a discussion of approaches. Am. Zool. 19,357 -366.
Irschick, D. J. and Jayne, B. C. (1999). A field study of the effects of incline on the escape locomotion of a bipedal lizard, Callisaurus draconoides. Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 72,44 -56.[Medline]
Janis, C. M. and Wilhelm, P. B. (1993). Where there mammalian pursuit predators in the Tertiary? Dances with wolf avatars. J. Mamm. Evol. 1,103 -125.
Jarman, P. J. and Jarman, M. V. (1974). The dynamics of ungulate social organization. In Serengeti: Dymanics of an Ecosystem (ed. A. R. Sinclair and M. Norton-Griffiths), pp.185 -220. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Jones, J. H. and Lindstedt, S. L. (1993). Limits to maximal performance. Annu. Rev. Physiol. 55,547 -569.[Medline]
LaBarbera, M. (1989). Analysing body size as a factor in ecology and evolution. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 20,97 -117.
Lee, D. V., Walter, R. M., Deban, S. M. and Carrier, D. R.
(2001). Influence of increased rotational inertia on the turning
performance of humans. J. Exp. Biol.
204,3927
-3934.
Linstedt, S. L., Hokanson, J. F., Wells, D. J., Swain, S. D., Hoppeler, H. and Navarro, V. (1991). Running energetics in the pronghorn antelope. Nature 353,748 -750.[Medline]
Losos, J. B. (1990a). The evolution of form and function: morphology and locomotor performance in West Indian Anolis lizards. Evolution 44,1189 -1203.
Losos, J. B. (1990b). Ecomorphology, performance capability, and scaling of West Indian Anolis lizards: an evolutionary analysis. Ecol. Mon. 60,369 -388.
Marquet, P. A. and Taper, M. L. (1998). On size and area: patterns of mammalian body size extremes across landmasses. Evol. Ecol. 12,127 -139.
McMahon, T. A. (1975a). Using body size to
understand the structural design of animals: quadrupedal locomotion.
J. Appl. Physiol. 39,619
-627.
McMahon, T. A. (1975b). Allometry and biomechanics: limb bones in adult ungulates. Am. Nat. 109,547 -563.
Miles, D. B., Sinervo, B. and Frankino, W. A. (2000). Reproductive burden, locomotor performance, and the cost of reproduction in free ranging lizards. Evolution 54,1386 -1395.[Medline]
Nowak, R. M. (1999). Walker's Mammals of the World, 6th edn. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Prothero, D. R. and Sereno, P. C. (1982). Allometry and paleoecology of medial Miocene dwarf rhinoceros from Texas Gulf Coastal Plain. Paleobiol. 8, 16-30.
Rubin, C. T. and Lanyon, L. E. (1984). Dynamic strain similarity in vertebrates: an alternative to allometric limb bones scaling. J. Theor. Biol. 107,321 -327.[Medline]
Schmidt-Nielsen, K. (1984). Scaling: Why is Animal Size So Important? New York: Cambridge University Press.
Silva, M. (1998). Allometric scaling of body length: elastic or geometric similarity in mammalian design. J. Mammal. 79,20 -32.
Silva, M. and Downing, J. A. (1995). The allometric scaling of density and body mass: a nonlinear relationship for terrestrial mammals. Am. Nat. 145,704 -727.
Sokal, R. R. and Rohlf, F. J. (1995). Biometry, 3rd edn. New York: Freeman and Co.
Sprugel, D. G. (1983). Correcting for bias in log-transformed allometric equations. Ecology 64,209 -210.
Swartz, S. M. and Biewener, A. A. (1992). Shape and scaling. In Biomechanics (Structures and Systems): A Practical Approach (ed. A. A. Biewener), pp.21 -43. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Taylor, C. R. (1985). Force development during sustained locomotion: a determinant of gait, speed and metabolic power. J. Exp. Biol. 115,253 -262.[Abstract]
Taylor, C. R., Schmidt-Nielsen, K., Dm iel, R. and Fedak, M.
(1971). Effect of hyperthermia on heat balance during running in
the African hunting dog. Am. J. Physiol.
220,823
-827.
Van Damme, R. and Van Dooren, T. J. M. (1999). Absolute versus per unit body length speed of prey as an estimator of vulnerability to predation. Anim. Behav. 57,347 -352.[Medline]
Webb, P. W. (1976). The effect of size on the fast-start performance of rainbow trout Salmo gairdneri, and consideration of piscivorous predator-prey interactions. J. Exp. Biol. 65,157 -177.[Abstract]
Witter, M. S., Cuthill, I. C. and Bonser, R. H. C. (1994). Experimental investigations of mass-dependent predation risk in the European starling, Sturnus vulgaris. Anim. Behav. 48,201 -222.
Zar, J. H. (1996). Biostatistical Analysis, 3rd edn. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc.