Click here to close
Hello! We notice that you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Xenbase and may cause the site to display incorrectly.
We suggest using a current version of Chrome,
FireFox, or Safari.
Ecol Evol
2021 May 03;1112:7569-7578. doi: 10.1002/ece3.7589.
Show Gene links
Show Anatomy links
Cooperation behavior of fore- And hindlimbs during jumping in Rana dybowskii and Xenopus laevis.
Li M
,
Gao Z
,
Wang J
,
Song W
,
Zhang Q
,
Tong J
,
Ren L
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
Frogs are characterized by their outstanding jumping ability, depending on the rapid extension of hindlimbs to propel their bodies into air. A typical jumping cycle could be broken into four phases: preparation, takeoff, flight, and landing. Considerable research has been performed to discuss the function of hindlimbs of frogs during takeoff phase, whereas the literature of limbs' motion in jumping between different species was limited. To profile the evolution of locomotion in anurans, it is necessary to investigate on the motion of fore- and hindlimbs of frogs within different taxa. In this work, we put forward a detailed description of jumping behavior of two frog species, Rana dybowskii and Xenopus laevis. High-speed cameras were used to explore the movement of different joints in fore- and hindlimbs of these two animals, and kinematic analysis was operated to identify both homologous behaviors and significant differences between them. We found that the Rana dybowskii's fore- and hindlimbs had good cooperation during jumping, while the Xenopus laevis' uncooperative behavior in limbs may give a functional explanation for the deficiency in terrestrial jumping; besides, the R. dybowskii's landing followed the "hands-belly-feet slap" strategy, and Xenopus laevis had clumsy landing with "belly-flops" sequence. The result gained here clarifies the cooperation behavior of anuran limbs and may supply a new insight into our understanding of the anuran's evolution.
FIGURE 1. Schematic view of a frog's jump. R1‐shoulder; R2‐elbow; R3‐wrist; RF‐fore toe; R4‐hip; R5‐knee; R6‐ankle; R7‐TMT; R8‐midfoot; RR‐rear toe; a
1‐knee angle; a
2‐ankle angle; a
3‐TMT angle; a
4‐midfoot angle; β1‐elbow angle; β2‐wrist angle
FIGURE 2. Frame sequences of a R. dybowskii's jump. T0‐Preparation phase; T1‐Takeoff phase; T2‐Flight phase; T3‐Landing phase; a is the head‐up moment in preparation; b is the moment hindlimbs just leave the ground; c is the initial time of flight; d is the moment forelimbs hit the ground; e is the moment the body hits the ground; f is the moment all limbs land on ground
FIGURE 3. Angle motion profiles of the R. dybowskii ' joints during jumping, (a‐f) is the angle of knee, ankle, TMT, midfoot, elbow, and wrist, respectively
FIGURE 4. Frame sequences of a X.lavis's jump. T0‐Preparation phase; T1‐Takeoff phase; T3‐Landing phase; a is the head‐up moment in preparation; b is the moment hindlimbs is about to leave; c is the moment hindlimbs just takeoff from the ground; d is the moment the body hits the ground; e is the moment whole body land on ground, and all limbs are about to rotate to recover preparation posture
FIGURE 5. Angle motion profiles of the X.lavis' joints during jumping, (a–f) are the angle of knee, ankle, TMT, midfoot, elbow, and wrist,respectively
FIGURE 6. Differences on takeoff velocity of Rana dybowskii and Xenopus laevis (a) velocity on knee, V5 (b) velocity on snout, Vs
FIGURE 7. Angular velocity on knee (a1) and ankle (a2) of (a) Rana dybowskii and (b) Xenopus laevis
Abdala,
Frog tendon structure and its relationship with locomotor modes.
2018, Pubmed
Abdala,
Frog tendon structure and its relationship with locomotor modes.
2018,
Pubmed
Akella,
Hopping isn't always about the legs: forelimb muscle activity patterns during toad locomotion.
2011,
Pubmed
Anderson,
A stem batrachian from the Early Permian of Texas and the origin of frogs and salamanders.
2008,
Pubmed
Astley,
Chasing maximal performance: a cautionary tale from the celebrated jumping frogs of Calaveras County.
2013,
Pubmed
Astley,
Robust jumping performance and elastic energy recovery from compliant perches in tree frogs.
2015,
Pubmed
Astley,
The mechanics of elastic loading and recoil in anuran jumping.
2014,
Pubmed
Astley,
Evidence for a vertebrate catapult: elastic energy storage in the plantaris tendon during frog jumping.
2012,
Pubmed
Azizi,
Locomotor function shapes the passive mechanical properties and operating lengths of muscle.
2014,
Pubmed
Azizi,
Anticipatory motor patterns limit muscle stretch during landing in toads.
2013,
Pubmed
Azizi,
Reduce torques and stick the landing: limb posture during landing in toads.
2014,
Pubmed
Azizi,
Muscle performance during frog jumping: influence of elasticity on muscle operating lengths.
2010,
Pubmed
Cox,
Sensory feedback and coordinating asymmetrical landing in toads.
2016,
Pubmed
Cox,
Evidence toads may modulate landing preparation without predicting impact time.
2017,
Pubmed
Cox,
The integration of sensory feedback in the modulation of anuran landing preparation.
2020,
Pubmed
Cox,
Forelimb kinematics during hopping and landing in toads.
2015,
Pubmed
Essner,
Landing in basal frogs: evidence of saltational patterns in the evolution of anuran locomotion.
2010,
Pubmed
Gillis,
Hindlimb extensor muscle function during jumping and swimming in the toad (Bufo marinus).
2000,
Pubmed
Handrigan,
The anuran Bauplan: a review of the adaptive, developmental, and genetic underpinnings of frog and tadpole morphology.
2007,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Herrel,
Jumping performance in the highly aquatic frog, Xenopus tropicalis: sex-specific relationships between morphology and performance.
2014,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Longo,
Beyond power amplification: latch-mediated spring actuation is an emerging framework for the study of diverse elastic systems.
2019,
Pubmed
Marjanović,
Fossils, molecules, divergence times, and the origin of lissamphibians.
2007,
Pubmed
Moo,
In vivo muscle force and muscle power during near-maximal frog jumps.
2017,
Pubmed
Nauwelaerts,
Take-off and landing forces in jumping frogs.
2006,
Pubmed
Prikryl,
Pelvic and thigh musculature in frogs (Anura) and origin of anuran jumping locomotion.
2009,
Pubmed
Reilly,
The evolution of jumping in frogs: morphological evidence for the basal anuran locomotor condition and the radiation of locomotor systems in crown group anurans.
2011,
Pubmed
Reilly,
Functional evolution of jumping in frogs: Interspecific differences in take-off and landing.
2016,
Pubmed
Richards,
Kinematic control of extreme jump angles in the red-legged running frog, Kassina maculata.
2017,
Pubmed
Roberts,
Probing the limits to muscle-powered accelerations: lessons from jumping bullfrogs.
2003,
Pubmed
Stoessel,
Comparative intralimb coordination in avian bipedal locomotion.
2012,
Pubmed
Wang,
The role of fore- and hindlimbs during jumping in the Dybowski's frog (Rana dybowskii).
2014,
Pubmed
