Burst muscle performance predicts the speed, acceleration, and turning performance of Anna's hummingbirds

  1. Paolo S Segre
  2. Roslyn Dakin
  3. Victor B Zordan
  4. Michael H Dickinson
  5. Andrew D Straw
  6. Douglas L Altshuler  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of British Columbia, Canada
  2. University of California, Riverside, United States
  3. California Institute of Technology, United States

Abstract

Despite recent advances in the study of animal flight, the biomechanical determinants of maneuverability are poorly understood. It is thought that maneuverability may be influenced by intrinsic body mass and wing morphology, and by physiological muscle capacity, but this hypothesis has not yet been evaluated because it requires tracking a large number of free flight maneuvers from known individuals. We used an automated tracking system to record flight sequences from 20 Anna's hummingbirds flying solo and in competition in a large chamber. We found that burst muscle capacity predicted most performance metrics. Hummingbirds with higher burst capacity flew with faster velocities, accelerations, and rotations, and they used more demanding complex turns. In contrast, body mass did not predict variation in maneuvering performance, and wing morphology predicted only the use of arcing turns and high centripetal accelerations. Collectively, our results indicate that burst muscle capacity is a key predictor of maneuverability.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Paolo S Segre

    Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Roslyn Dakin

    Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Victor B Zordan

    Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Michael H Dickinson

    Biology and Bioengineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Andrew D Straw

    Biology and Bioengineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Douglas L Altshuler

    Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
    For correspondence
    doug@zoology.ubc.ca
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Russ Fernald, Stanford University, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: All procedures were conducted under approval of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at the University of California, Riverside and the Animal Care Committee at the University of British Columbia.

Version history

  1. Received: August 27, 2015
  2. Accepted: November 13, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 19, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: January 18, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Segre et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,492
    views
  • 359
    downloads
  • 27
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Paolo S Segre
  2. Roslyn Dakin
  3. Victor B Zordan
  4. Michael H Dickinson
  5. Andrew D Straw
  6. Douglas L Altshuler
(2015)
Burst muscle performance predicts the speed, acceleration, and turning performance of Anna's hummingbirds
eLife 4:e11159.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11159

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11159

Further reading

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Ecology
    Kazushi Tsutsui, Ryoya Tanaka ... Keisuke Fujii
    Research Article

    Collaborative hunting, in which predators play different and complementary roles to capture prey, has been traditionally believed to be an advanced hunting strategy requiring large brains that involve high-level cognition. However, recent findings that collaborative hunting has also been documented in smaller-brained vertebrates have placed this previous belief under strain. Here, using computational multi-agent simulations based on deep reinforcement learning, we demonstrate that decisions underlying collaborative hunts do not necessarily rely on sophisticated cognitive processes. We found that apparently elaborate coordination can be achieved through a relatively simple decision process of mapping between states and actions related to distance-dependent internal representations formed by prior experience. Furthermore, we confirmed that this decision rule of predators is robust against unknown prey controlled by humans. Our computational ecological results emphasize that collaborative hunting can emerge in various intra- and inter-specific interactions in nature, and provide insights into the evolution of sociality.

    1. Ecology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Théo Constant, F Stephen Dobson ... Sylvain Giroud
    Research Article

    Seasonal animal dormancy is widely interpreted as a physiological response for surviving energetic challenges during the harshest times of the year (the physiological constraint hypothesis). However, there are other mutually non-exclusive hypotheses to explain the timing of animal dormancy, that is, entry into and emergence from hibernation (i.e. dormancy phenology). Survival advantages of dormancy that have been proposed are reduced risks of predation and competition (the ‘life-history’ hypothesis), but comparative tests across animal species are few. Using the phylogenetic comparative method applied to more than 20 hibernating mammalian species, we found support for both hypotheses as explanations for the phenology of dormancy. In accordance with the life-history hypotheses, sex differences in hibernation emergence and immergence were favored by the sex difference in reproductive effort. In addition, physiological constraint may influence the trade-off between survival and reproduction such that low temperatures and precipitation, as well as smaller body mass, influence sex differences in phenology. We also compiled initial evidence that ectotherm dormancy may be (1) less temperature dependent than previously thought and (2) associated with trade-offs consistent with the life-history hypothesis. Thus, dormancy during non-life-threatening periods that are unfavorable for reproduction may be more widespread than previously thought.