[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
On 23 Apr 2011, at 19:47, Don Ohmes <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Perhaps it might seem overly broad to use the term "locomotion" in
> regard to very short limbs which are used to assist the snout in
> entering and retreating from nooks and crannies that are just large
> enough the head (or even slightly too small in the case of an
> 'expandable' substrate), but it is nonetheless technically correct.
I think most people in biomechanics would agree that for something to
be considered locomotion you have to move the centre of mass a
reasonable distance. Otherwise opening a door would count as
locomotion. Although your definition makes your earlier statement a
bit easier to understand. I would go out a limb and say that I am
99.9% certain that an animal of the relative limb proportions of these
things was not adapted to use it's pectoral limb for terrestrial
locomotion (in the sense of actually effecting translation of the
whole body centre of mass). They are far, far too short.