Rectilinear locomotion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Rectilinear locomotion or rectilinear progression is a mode of locomotion most often associated with snakes. In particular, it is associated with heavy-bodied species such as terrestrial pythons and boas, although most snakes are capable of it.[1] It is one of at least five forms of locomotion used by snakes, the others being lateral undulation, sidewinding, concertina movement, and slide-pushing.[2][3] Unlike all other modes of snake locomotion, in which the snake bends its body, in rectilinear locomotion, the snake flexes its body only when turning.[1][4]

Bio-mechanics of Rectilinear Locomotion[edit]

Rectilinear locomotion relies upon two opposing muscles, the costcutaneous inferior and superior, which are present on every rib and connect the ribs to the skin.[5][6] Although it was originally believed that the ribs moved in a "walking" pattern during rectilinear movement, studies have shown that the ribs themselves do not move, only the muscles and the skin move to produce forward motion.[2] First, the costcutaneous superior lifts a section of the snake's belly from the ground[6] and places it ahead of its former position. Then, the costcutaneous inferior pulls backwards while the belly scales are on the ground, propelling the snake forwards. These sections of contact propagate posteriorly, which results in the ventral surface, or belly, moving in discrete sections akin to "steps" while the overall body of the snake moves continuously forward at a relatively constant speed.[5]

Uses of Rectilinear Locomotion[edit]

This method of locomotion is extremely slow (between 1–6 cm per second), but is also almost noiseless and very hard to detect, making it the mode of choice for many species when stalking prey. It is primarily used when the space being traversed is too constricting to allow for other forms of movement. When climbing, snakes will often use rectilinear locomotion in conjunction with concertina movements to exploit terrain features such as interstices in the surfaces they are climbing.[6]

In Robotics[edit]

The development of rectilinear movement in robotics is centered around the development of snakelike robots, which have significant advantages over robots with wheeled or bipedal locomotion. The primary advantage in the creation of a serpentine robot is that the robot is often capable of traversing rough, muddy, and complex terrain that is often prohibitive to wheeled robots.[7][8] Secondly, due to the mechanisms responsible for rectilinear and other forms of serpentine locomotion, the robots tend to have repetitive motor elements, which makes the entire robot relatively robust to mechanical failure.[7][9]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b C. Gans (1986). Locomotion of Limbless Vertebrates: Pattern and Evolution. 
  2. ^ a b Gray, J. (1946). "The mechanism of locomotion in snakes" (PDF). The Journal of Experimental Biology. 23: 101–120. 
  3. ^ Gans, Carl (1984). "Slide-pushing: a transitional locomotor method of elongate squamates.". Symposium of the Zoological Society of London. 52: 12–26. 
  4. ^ Bogert, Charles (1947). "Rectilinear locomotion in snakes". Copiea. 1947: 253–254. 
  5. ^ a b Lissman, H.W. (1949). "Rectilinear locomotion in a snake (Boa occidentalis)" (PDF). Journal of Experimental Biology. 26: 368–379. 
  6. ^ a b c Marvi, H.; Bridges, J.; Hu, DL. (2013). "Snakes mimic earthworms: propulsion using rectilinear traveling waves.". J R Soc Interface. 
  7. ^ a b Saito, M.; Fukuya, M.; Iwasaki, T. "Modeling, analysis, and synthesis of serpentine locomotion with a multilink robotic snake" (PDF). Forth Institute of Computer Science Internal Publications. 
  8. ^ Date, Hisashi; Takita, Yoshihiro (2007). "Adaptive locomotion of a snake like robot based on curvature derivatives". Intelligent Robots and Systems. doi:10.1109/IROS.2007.4399635 – via IEEE. 
  9. ^ Crepsi, Alessandro; Badertscher, Andre; Guignard, Andre; Ijspeert, Auke Jan (2004). "AmphiBot I: an amphibious snake-like robot". Robotics and Autonomous Systems. 50 (4): 163–175.