|
| |
|
|
|
|
||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | ||||
|
Fig. 2. Verification of the numerical model. Observed Xenopus laevis
swimming velocity (solid gray lines) and simulated velocity traces (dashed
black lines) of three representative power strokes during (A) slow swimming,
(B) moderate speed swimming and (C) fast swimming. Note that each stroke
occurred over a different duration. (D) Relative model error
[100%x(simulated velocity – observed velocity)/peak observed
stroke velocity] at 10 time points of the power stroke (mean ± s.d.,
N=6 strokes; frog 1). Because stroke durations were variable, the 10
time points were normalized by the total duration of each power stroke. Note
that all data points are, on average, slightly below zero relative error,
indicating that the model generally underestimates swimming velocity at each
time point during the stroke. (E) Simulated relative swimming velocity
(simulated swimming velocity/observed peak stroke velocity) vs
observed relative swimming velocity (observed swimming velocity/observed peak
stroke velocity) for the six swimming strokes represented in D, from frog 1.
Different symbols represent different strokes.
|
