FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
PloS one2013; 8(9); e74134; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074134

Anatomically asymmetrical runners move more asymmetrically at the same metabolic cost.

Abstract: We hypothesized that, as occurring in cars, body structural asymmetries could generate asymmetry in the kinematics/dynamics of locomotion, ending up in a higher metabolic cost of transport, i.e. more 'fuel' needed to travel a given distance. Previous studies found the asymmetries in horses' body negatively correlated with galloping performance. In this investigation, we analyzed anatomical differences between the left and right lower limbs as a whole by performing 3D cross-correlation of Magnetic Resonance Images of 19 male runners, clustered as Untrained Runners, Occasional Runners and Skilled Runners. Running kinematics of their body centre of mass were obtained from the body segments coordinates measured by a 3D motion capture system at incremental running velocities on a treadmill. A recent mathematical procedure quantified the asymmetry of the body centre of mass trajectory between the left and right steps. During the same sessions, runners' metabolic consumption was measured and the cost of transport was calculated. No correlations were found between anatomical/kinematic variables and the metabolic cost of transport, regardless of the training experience. However, anatomical symmetry significant correlated to the kinematic symmetry, and the most trained subjects showed the highest level of kinematic symmetry during running. Results suggest that despite the significant effects of anatomical asymmetry on kinematics, either those changes are too small to affect economy or some plastic compensation in the locomotor system mitigates the hypothesized change in energy expenditure of running.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2013-09-24 PubMed ID: 24086316PubMed Central: PMC3782489DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074134Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The researchers explored whether anatomical asymmetry in humans leads to an increased metabolic cost — essentially, does being physically asymmetrical make running more exhausting. This was assessed by investigating the correlation between structural asymmetries and running kinematics/dynamics, and their relation to energy consumption during running. The research found no significant correlation between anatomical variation and energy expenditure, but did note that physical symmetry correlated with more symmetrical movement, particularly in highly trained runners.

Research Methodology

  • The research team started by hypothesizing that body structural asymmetries may result in asymmetrical locomotion, which could potentially increase the metabolic cost of running — essentially requiring more ‘fuel’ for the same distance. This is based on similar findings in studies of horse locomotion.
  • The anatomical differences between the left and right lower limbs were examined using magnetic resonance images (MRIs) from a group of 19 male runners. These were divided into three groups: untrained runners, occasional runners, and skilled runners.
  • Running kinematics were studied by observing and recording the movement of the runners’ bodies on a treadmill, focusing on the centre of mass. The body’s coordinates were measured using a 3D motion capture system, and a mathematical procedure was employed to quantify the symmetry of the body’s motion during running.
  • The metabolic consumption of the runners was measured in the same sessions, and the cost of transport — energy used relative to distance run — was calculated.

Findings and Implications

  • No significant correlation was found between anatomical and kinematic variables and the metabolic cost of running. This held true regardless of the runners’ training experience.
  • However, there was a significant correlation between anatomical symmetry and kinematic symmetry. The most trained subjects demonstrated the highest level of kinematic symmetry during running.
  • The research suggests that while anatomical asymmetry can affect running kinematics, it doesn’t noticeably impact the energy expenditure. Either the changes induced by asymmetry are too small to affect the cost of transport, or the locomotor system compensates for the differences to mitigate additional energy costs.
  • These results challenge the initial hypothesis, suggesting a more nuanced relationship between anatomical structure and running efficiency. It appears that training can minimize or control the impact of asymmetry on running dynamics.

Cite This Article

APA
Seminati E, Nardello F, Zamparo P, Ardigò LP, Faccioli N, Minetti AE. (2013). Anatomically asymmetrical runners move more asymmetrically at the same metabolic cost. PLoS One, 8(9), e74134. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0074134

Publication

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
NlmUniqueID: 101285081
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 8
Issue: 9
Pages: e74134
PII: e74134

Researcher Affiliations

Seminati, Elena
  • Department of Pathophysiology and Transplantation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Nardello, Francesca
    Zamparo, Paola
      Ardigò, Luca P
        Faccioli, Niccolò
          Minetti, Alberto E

            MeSH Terms

            • Adult
            • Biomechanical Phenomena
            • Energy Metabolism
            • Humans
            • Magnetic Resonance Imaging
            • Male
            • Middle Aged
            • Running
            • Young Adult

            Conflict of Interest Statement

            The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

            References

            This article includes 37 references
            1. Sadeghi H, Allard P, Prince F, Labelle H. Symmetry and limb dominance in able-bodied gait: a review.. Gait Posture 2000 Sep;12(1):34-45.
              pubmed: 10996295doi: 10.1016/s0966-6362(00)00070-9google scholar: lookup
            2. Nardello F, Ardigò LP, Minetti AE. Human locomotion: Right/left symmetry in 3D trajectory of body centre of mass.. Gait & Posture 30(S): S80–S81.
            3. Forczek W, Staszkiewicz R. An evaluation of symmetry in the lower limb joints during the able-bodied gait of women and men.. J Hum Kinet 2012 Dec;35:47-57.
              pmc: PMC3588688pubmed: 23486255doi: 10.2478/v10078-012-0078-5google scholar: lookup
            4. Maupas E, Paysant J, Martinet N, André J. Asymmetric leg activity in healthy subjects during walking, detected by electrogoniometry.. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 1999 Jul;14(6):403-11.
              pubmed: 10521622doi: 10.1016/s0268-0033(99)00005-4google scholar: lookup
            5. Cuk T, Leben-Seljak P, Stefancic M. Lateral asymmetry of human long bones.. Variability and Evolution 9: 19–32.
            6. Lund FH. Physical asymmetries and disorientation.. The American journal of Psychology 42(1): 51–62.
            7. Gurney B, Mermier C, Robergs R, Gibson A, Rivero D. Effects of limb-length discrepancy on gait economy and lower-extremity muscle activity in older adults.. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001 Jun;83(6):907-15.
              pubmed: 11407800doi: 10.2106/00004623-200106000-00013google scholar: lookup
            8. Seeley MK, Umberger BR, Clasey JL, Shapiro R. The relation between mild leg-length inequality and able-bodied gait asymmetry.. J Sports Sci Med 2010;9(4):572-9.
              pmc: PMC3761822pubmed: 24149783
            9. Souman JL, Frissen I, Sreenivasa MN, Ernst MO. Walking straight into circles.. Curr Biol 2009 Sep 29;19(18):1538-42.
              pubmed: 19699093doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2009.07.053google scholar: lookup
            10. Herzog W, Nigg BM, Read LJ, Olsson E. Asymmetries in ground reaction force patterns in normal human gait.. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1989 Feb;21(1):110-4.
              pubmed: 2927295doi: 10.1249/00005768-198902000-00020google scholar: lookup
            11. Mattes SJ, Martin PE, Royer TD. Walking symmetry and energy cost in persons with unilateral transtibial amputations: matching prosthetic and intact limb inertial properties.. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000 May;81(5):561-8.
              pubmed: 10807092doi: 10.1016/s0003-9993(00)90035-2google scholar: lookup
            12. Halling Thomsen M, Tolver Jensen A, Sørensen H, Lindegaard C, Haubro Andersen P. Symmetry indices based on accelerometric data in trotting horses.. J Biomech 2010 Sep 17;43(13):2608-12.
              pubmed: 20553684doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2010.05.004google scholar: lookup
            13. Manning JT, Pickup LJ. Symmetry and performance in middle distance runners.. Int J Sports Med 1998 Apr;19(3):205-9.
              pubmed: 9630027doi: 10.1055/s-2007-971905google scholar: lookup
            14. Manning JT, Ockenden L. Fluctuating asymmetry in racehorses.. Nature 1994 Jul 21;370(6486):185-6.
              pubmed: 8028662doi: 10.1038/370185a0google scholar: lookup
            15. Lee Y, Hara T, Fujita H, Itoh S, Ishigaki T. Automated detection of pulmonary nodules in helical CT images based on an improved template-matching technique.. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001 Jul;20(7):595-604.
              pubmed: 11465466doi: 10.1109/42.932744google scholar: lookup
            16. Wang P, DeNunzio A, Okunieff P, O'Dell WG. Lung metastases detection in CT images using 3D template matching.. Med Phys 2007 Mar;34(3):915-22.
              pubmed: 17441237doi: 10.1118/1.2436970google scholar: lookup
            17. Ambrosini RD, Wang P, O'Dell WG. Computer-aided detection of metastatic brain tumors using automated three-dimensional template matching.. J Magn Reson Imaging 2010 Jan;31(1):85-93.
              pmc: PMC2799295pubmed: 20027576doi: 10.1002/jmri.22009google scholar: lookup
            18. Lewis J. Fast normalized cross-correlation.. .
            19. Minetti AE, Ardigò LP, Saibene F. Mechanical determinants of the minimum energy cost of gradient running in humans.. J Exp Biol 1994 Oct;195:211-25.
              pubmed: 7964412doi: 10.1242/jeb.195.1.211google scholar: lookup
            20. Dempster WT, Gabel WC, Felts WJ. The anthropometry of the manual work space for the seated subject.. Am J Phys Anthropol 1959 Dec;17(4):289-317.
              pubmed: 13815872doi: 10.1002/ajpa.1330170405google scholar: lookup
            21. Winter D. Biomechanics and motor control of human movement.. .
            22. Minetti AE. The mathematical description (Lissajous contour) of the 3D trajectory of the body centre of mass: A locomotor ‘signature’ for the physiology, biomechanics and pathology of human and animal gaits.. Gait & Posture 30(S): S153–S153.
            23. Minetti AE, Cisotti C, Mian OS. The mathematical description of the body centre of mass 3D path in human and animal locomotion.. J Biomech 2011 May 17;44(8):1471-7.
              pubmed: 21463861doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.03.014google scholar: lookup
            24. di Prampero PE. The energy cost of human locomotion on land and in water.. Int J Sports Med 1986 Apr;7(2):55-72.
              pubmed: 3519480doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1025736google scholar: lookup
            25. MARGARIA R, CERRETELLI P, AGHEMO P, SASSI G. Energy cost of running.. J Appl Physiol 1963 Mar;18:367-70.
              pubmed: 13932993doi: 10.1152/jappl.1963.18.2.367google scholar: lookup
            26. Daniels JT. A physiologist's view of running economy.. Med Sci Sports Exerc 1985 Jun;17(3):332-8.
              pubmed: 3894870
            27. Slawinski JS, Billat VL. Difference in mechanical and energy cost between highly, well, and nontrained runners.. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004 Aug;36(8):1440-6.
              pubmed: 15292755doi: 10.1249/01.mss.0000135785.68760.96google scholar: lookup
            28. Beneke R, Hütler M. The effect of training on running economy and performance in recreational athletes.. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2005 Oct;37(10):1794-9.
              pubmed: 16260983doi: 10.1249/01.mss.0000176399.67121.02google scholar: lookup
            29. McGregor SJ, Busa MA, Yaggie JA, Bollt EM. High resolution MEMS accelerometers to estimate VO2 and compare running mechanics between highly trained inter-collegiate and untrained runners.. PLoS One 2009 Oct 6;4(10):e7355.
              pmc: PMC2752199pubmed: 19806216doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007355google scholar: lookup
            30. Cavanagh PR, Pollock ML, Landa J. A biomechanical comparison of elite and good distance runners.. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1977;301:328-45.
              pubmed: 270926doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1977.tb38211.xgoogle scholar: lookup
            31. Nakayama Y, Kudo K, Ohtsuki T. Variability and fluctuation in running gait cycle of trained runners and non-runners.. Gait Posture 2010 Mar;31(3):331-5.
              pubmed: 20056419doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.12.003google scholar: lookup
            32. Gurney B. Leg length discrepancy.. Gait Posture 2002 Apr;15(2):195-206.
              pubmed: 11869914doi: 10.1016/s0966-6362(01)00148-5google scholar: lookup
            33. Saibene F, Minetti AE. Biomechanical and physiological aspects of legged locomotion in humans.. Eur J Appl Physiol 2003 Jan;88(4-5):297-316.
              pubmed: 12527959doi: 10.1007/s00421-002-0654-9google scholar: lookup
            34. Kong PW, Candelaria NG, Smith DR. Running in new and worn shoes: a comparison of three types of cushioning footwear.. Br J Sports Med 2009 Oct;43(10):745-9.
              pubmed: 18801775doi: 10.1136/bjsm.2008.047761google scholar: lookup
            35. Hardin EC, van den Bogert AJ, Hamill J. Kinematic adaptations during running: effects of footwear, surface, and duration.. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2004 May;36(5):838-44.
              pubmed: 15126719doi: 10.1249/01.mss.0000126605.65966.40google scholar: lookup
            36. Alexander RM. Optimization and gaits in the locomotion of vertebrates.. Physiol Rev 1989 Oct;69(4):1199-227.
              pubmed: 2678167doi: 10.1152/physrev.1989.69.4.1199google scholar: lookup
            37. Srinivasan M. Fifteen observations on the structure of energy-minimizing gaits in many simple biped models.. J R Soc Interface 2011 Jan 6;8(54):74-98.
              pmc: PMC3024815pubmed: 20542957doi: 10.1098/rsif.2009.0544google scholar: lookup

            Citations

            This article has been cited 12 times.
            1. Jacobson M, Kantharaju P, Jeong H, Ryu JK, Park JJ, Chung HJ, Kim M. Foot contact forces can be used to personalize a wearable robot during human walking. Sci Rep 2022 Jun 29;12(1):10947.
              doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-14776-9pubmed: 35768457google scholar: lookup
            2. Huang CH, Aydemir B, Jalasutram A, Kabir I, Foucher KC. Impact of step length asymmetry on walking energetics in women with hip Osteoarthritis: A pilot study. J Biomech 2021 Dec 2;129:110862.
              doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110862pubmed: 34794042google scholar: lookup
            3. Derungs A, Amft O. Estimating wearable motion sensor performance from personal biomechanical models and sensor data synthesis. Sci Rep 2020 Jul 10;10(1):11450.
              doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-68225-6pubmed: 32651412google scholar: lookup
            4. Askew GN, McFarlane LA, Minetti AE, Buckley JG. Energy cost of ambulation in trans-tibial amputees using a dynamic-response foot with hydraulic versus rigid 'ankle': insights from body centre of mass dynamics. J Neuroeng Rehabil 2019 Mar 14;16(1):39.
              doi: 10.1186/s12984-019-0508-xpubmed: 30871573google scholar: lookup
            5. Beck ON, Azua EN, Grabowski AM. Step time asymmetry increases metabolic energy expenditure during running. Eur J Appl Physiol 2018 Oct;118(10):2147-2154.
              doi: 10.1007/s00421-018-3939-3pubmed: 30027520google scholar: lookup
            6. Nauwelaerts S, Hobbs SJ, Back W. A horse's locomotor signature: COP path determined by the individual limb. PLoS One 2017;12(2):e0167477.
              doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0167477pubmed: 28196073google scholar: lookup
            7. Turchet L, Camponogara I, Cesari P. Interactive footstep sounds modulate the perceptual-motor aftereffect of treadmill walking. Exp Brain Res 2015 Jan;233(1):205-14.
              doi: 10.1007/s00221-014-4104-9pubmed: 25234404google scholar: lookup
            8. Rabello R, Desai GA, Gruber AH. Inconsistent Effects of Experience on Running Biomechanics May be Influenced by Study Heterogeneity and Classification Criteria: a Systematic Review and Proposal of a Revised Taxonomy. Sports Med Open 2025 Jun 8;11(1):69.
              doi: 10.1186/s40798-025-00870-5pubmed: 40483619google scholar: lookup
            9. Vincent HK, Popp R, Cicilioni O, Vincent KR, Pezzullo L, Martenson M, Nixon RM. Reference biomechanical parameters and natural asymmetry among runners across the age spectrum without a history of running-related injuries. Front Sports Act Living 2025;7:1560756.
              doi: 10.3389/fspor.2025.1560756pubmed: 40376183google scholar: lookup
            10. Delgado-García G, Martín-López IM, Soto-Méndez F, Quílez-Maimón A, Boned-Gómez S. Does the Fatigue Induced by a 30-Minute Run Affect the Lower Limb Acceleration Spikes' Asymmetries?. Bioengineering (Basel) 2025 Mar 14;12(3).
              doi: 10.3390/bioengineering12030294pubmed: 40150758google scholar: lookup
            11. Bergamini E, Cereatti A, Pavei G. Walking symmetry is speed and index dependent. Sci Rep 2024 Aug 22;14(1):19548.
              doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-69461-wpubmed: 39174605google scholar: lookup
            12. Van Hooren B, Jukic I, Cox M, Frenken KG, Bautista I, Moore IS. The Relationship Between Running Biomechanics and Running Economy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies. Sports Med 2024 May;54(5):1269-1316.
              doi: 10.1007/s40279-024-01997-3pubmed: 38446400google scholar: lookup
            Subscribe to our newsletter
            Join 99,780 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.