spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online November 14, 2008
Journal of Experimental Biology 211, 3661-3670 (2008)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2008
doi: 10.1242/jeb.018754
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Material
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in JEB
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Vereecke, E. E.
Right arrow Articles by Aerts, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Vereecke, E. E.
Right arrow Articles by Aerts, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

The mechanics of the gibbon foot and its potential for elastic energy storage during bipedalism

Evie E. Vereecke1,2,* and Peter Aerts2,3

1 Department of Human Anatomy and Cell Biology, School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 3GE, UK
2 Laboratorium for Functional Morphology, University of Antwerp, Universiteitsplein 1, B-2610 Antwerp, Belgium
3 Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, University of Ghent, Watersportlaan 2, B-9000 Gent, Belgium


Figure 1
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1. Diagram of the gibbon foot indicating the major anatomical structures. Ga, gastrocnemius (part of the triceps); FF+FT, flexor fibularis and flexor tibialis (the long digital flexors); FDB, flexor digitorum brevis (the short digital flexors); PL, plantar ligaments; AT, Achilles' tendon.

 

Figure 2
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2. The four-linked segment foot model. (A) Video image of the gibbon foot with indication of the digitized points. (B) Diagram of the joint angles. K, knee joint; TC, talocrural joint; H, heel; TM, tarsometatarsal joint; MP, metatarsophalangeal joint; T, toes.

 

Figure 3
View larger version (10K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 3. Average plantar pressure (top) and force profile (bottom) against stance time (%) for the given gibbon subject [mass=6.3 kg; adapted from Vereecke et al. (Vereecke et al., 2005aGo; Vereecke et al., 2006bGo)]. The dashed line is the pressure under the TM joint (naviculare and M5 base), the dotted line is the pressure under the MP joint (metatarsal heads) and bold line is the pressure under the toes (distal phalanges). Bold line in force profile represents vertical force (Fy), solid line represents horizontal force (Fx).

 

Figure 4
View larger version (97K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 4. Sagittal foot motion during the stance phase, demonstrating, from left to right, touchdown, loading, heel-rise and push-off. Shown are three representative bipedal bouts of three different individuals (top, young adult male; middle, adult male; bottom, adult female – note heel-elevated position during loading phase in the latter).

 

Figure 5
View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 5. Stick figure of an average stance phase showing the four-segment link foot model and the ground reaction force vector. (A) Touchdown (0–10% stance phase), (B) loading phase (10–50% stance phase), (C) heel-rise (50–80% stance phase), and (D) push-off (80–100% stance phase); see text for details. [Note that the initial contact (0–10% stance phase) is typically made with a widely abducted hallux, not with the hindfoot (H–TM segment) although this illustration and Fig. 6 do not give this impression.]

 

Figure 6
View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 6. Butterfly (Pedotti) diagram illustrating the ground reaction force vectors as a function of foot length. The colours of the arrows indicate timing: orange arrows, 0–10% stance phase; green arrows, 10–50%; blue arrows, 50–80%; and red arrows, 80–100%. TM, tarsometatarsal joint; MP, metatarsophalangeal joint. Arrows pointing to the left denote braking, arrows pointing to the right denote acceleration.

 

Figure 7
View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 7. Combination of average joint angles (white line; grey shaded area indicates standard deviation) and moments at the TC (top, dashed line), TM (middle, dotted line) and MP(bottom, solid line) joints against stance time (%). Plantarflexor moments are positive, dorsiflexor moments negative; a decreasing angle means dorsiflexion, an increase points to plantarflexion. Shaded areas on the right denote positive power output (i.e. plantarflexor moment+joint plantarflexion).

 

Figure 8
View larger version (9K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 8. Instantaneous powers performed at the MP, TM and TC joints and the total foot power (SUM) during stance. The bars at the bottom indicate foot contact of the stance foot (black) and contralateral foot (grey).

 

Figure 9
View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 9. Power performed at the foot (sum of MP, TM and TC joint power; light blue) and total power performed to move the centre of mass (dark blue) during stance with estimates of positive and negative external work.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2008