Back

Biologically-constrained insect models enable realistic simulations and improve biomechanical predictions of locomotion

Yuval, O.; Amir, A.; Ozeri, E.; Ayali, A.

2025-11-14 animal behavior and cognition
10.1101/2025.11.13.687989 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Animal locomotion emerges from the complex interplay of morphology, neural control, and biomechanics, involving both active and passive elements. Insect have attracted much interest, and a rich ecosystem of computational models exists for insect locomotion. However, while active control mechanisms have been extensively studied, obtaining accurate and useful models remains challenging due to limited understanding of how detailed anatomical constraints and passive biomechanical properties shape movement. To address this, we developed anatomically accurate 3D models of the adult desert locust and mole cricket, two orthopteran insects that share a basic body plan but exhibit strikingly different morphologies linked to their habitats and specialized locomotor behaviors -- jumping in locusts versus subterranean digging in mole crickets. We fine-tuned these models using precise morphometric measurements for each major body segment. Furthermore, we quantified passive joint dynamics through high-speed videography of anesthetized locust, revealing a two-phase return motion and history-dependent resting angles. By integrating these biologically grounded constraints into physical simulations, we significantly narrowed the parameter space, resulting in more realistic simulations. Our approach provides new tools for predicting biologically relevant, yet experimentally challenging variables, such as joint torques and contact forces, which contribute directly to the understanding of the underlying biological phenomena. Moreover, these improved simulations offer valuable insight for designing energy-efficient soft robotic systems.

Published in Soft Robotics · not in our set (fewer than 10 published preprints to learn from) · training set

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.