QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s):
Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents

This Article Summary Full Text Full Text (PDF) Movies Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Fischer, M. S. Articles by Witte, H. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fischer, M. S. Articles by Witte, H.

Basic limb kinematics of small therian mammals

Martin S. Fischer^1,*, Nadja Schilling¹, Manuela Schmidt¹, Dieter Haarhaus² and Hartmut Witte¹

¹ Institut für Spezielle Zoologie und Evolutionsbiologie, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Jena, Erbertstrasse 1, D-07743 Jena, Germany
² IWF Knowledge and Media gGmbH, Nonnenstieg 72, D-37075 Göttingen, PO box 2351, Germany

View larger version (14K): [in a new window]   Fig. 1. Positions of captured skeletal landmarks and calculated angles of segments and joints projected onto the parasagittal plane.

View larger version (39K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2A. Mean values of forelimb segment angular excursions of typical sequences at symmetrical (A) and in-phase (B) gaits. Stance and swing phases are scaled to the same duration using the method of linear interpolation. Based on this method the data for each limb segment are smoothed but their characteristics are preserved. Note the uniformity of time schemes especially of segment displacements despite differences for example in shoulder joint angular excursions.

View larger version (37K): [in a new window]   Fig. 2B. Mean values of forelimb segment angular excursions of typical sequences at symmetrical (A) and in-phase (B) gaits. Stance and swing phases are scaled to the same duration using the method of linear interpolation. Based on this method the data for each limb segment are smoothed but their characteristics are preserved. Note the uniformity of time schemes especially of segment displacements despite differences for example in shoulder joint angular excursions.

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 4. Mean joint angles at touch-down and lift-off, illustrated as schematic fore- and hindlimb configurations considering limb proportions of all species under study (see Table 4) at symmetrical and in-phase gaits. Note the high uniform limb position at touch-down in contrast to that at lift-off and the more variable lift-off configuration of hindlimbs in comparison to forelimbs.

View larger version (44K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3B. Mean values of hindlimb segment angular excursions of typical sequences at symmetrical (A) and for trailing (B) and leading (C) limbs at in-phase gaits (see Fig. 2A,2B).

View larger version (40K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3C. Mean values of hindlimb segment angular excursions of typical sequences at symmetrical (A) and for trailing (B) and leading (C) limbs at in-phase gaits (see Fig. 2A,2B).

View larger version (38K): [in a new window]   Fig. 3A. Mean values of hindlimb segment angular excursions of typical sequences at symmetrical (A) and for trailing (B) and leading (C) limbs at in-phase gaits (see Fig. 2A,2B).

View larger version (29K): [in a new window]   Fig. 5. Schemes of limb configurations at touch-down and lift-off in 14 species at symmetrical (grey) and in-phase gaits (black). Limb proportions are set into the same ratios to emphasize the overall kinematic pattern.