|
| |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
First published online March 12, 2009
Journal of Experimental Biology 212, 945-953 (2009)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2009
doi: 10.1242/jeb.026161
Bats go head-under-heels: the biomechanics of landing on a ceiling
1 Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Brown University, Providence,
RI 02912, USA
2 Division of Engineering, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA
3 Institute of Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230
Odense M, Denmark
4 Center for Ecology and Conservation Biology, Boston University, 5 Cummington
Street, Boston, MA 02215, USA
* Author for correspondence (e-mail: dkr8{at}brown.edu)
Accepted 17 January 2009
Bats typically roost head-under-heels but they cannot hover in this position, thus, landing on a ceiling presents a biomechanical challenge. To land, a bat must perform an acrobatic flip that brings the claws of the toes in contact with the ceiling and do so gently enough as to avoid injury to its slender hindlimbs. In the present study, we sought to determine how bats land, to seek a link between landing kinematics and ceiling impact forces, and to determine whether landing strategies vary among bat species. To do this, we measured the kinematics and kinetics of landing behaviour in three species of bats as they landed on a force-measuring platform (Cynopterus brachyotis, N=3; Carollia perspicillata, N=5; Glossophaga soricina, N=5). Kinematics were similar for all bats within a species but differed among species. C. brachyotis performed four-point landings, during which body pitch increased until the ventral surface of the body faced the ceiling and the thumbs and hindlimbs simultaneously grasped the surface. Bats of the other two species performed two-point landings, whereby only the hindlimbs made contact with the ceiling. During these two-point landings, the hindlimbs were drawn up the side of the body to come in contact with the ceiling, causing simultaneous changes in body pitch, roll and yaw over the course of the landing sequence. Right-handed and left-handed forms of the two-point landing were observed, with individuals often switching back and forth between them among landing events. The four-point landing of C. brachyotis resulted in larger peak forces (3.7±2.4 body weights; median ± interquartile range) than the two-point landings of C. perspicillata (0.8±0.6 body weights) or G. soricina (0.8±0.2 body weights). Our results demonstrate that the kinematics and kinetics of landing vary among bat species and that there is a correlation between the way a bat moves its body when it lands and the magnitude of peak impact force it experiences during that landing. We postulate that these interspecific differences in impact force could result because of stronger selective pressure for gentle landing in cave-roosting (C. perspicillata, G. soricina) versus foliage-roosting (C. brachyotis) species.
Key words: bats, manoeuvrability, roosting ecology
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
Related articles in JEB:
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  K. Knight GYMNASTIC BATS TIP OR TWIST TO HANG J. Exp. Biol., April 1, 2009; 212(7): i - i. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
