A theoretical framework for aerodynamic braking and landing in gliding mammals
Nojiri, K.
Show abstract
Gliding enables mammals to forage and escape from predators by moving between discontinuous forests. Its benefits depend not only on glide distance but also on the ability to decelerate and land safely. This study developed a theoretical framework linking glide distance, gliding velocity, aerodynamic braking, body mass, and braking distance. Twenty-two representative distance-velocity observations from eight studies and five species were compiled. Among distance-velocity models, log-distance and saturated with V0 models received nearly equivalent support. Both models predicted increasing velocity with glide distance, with the rate of increase declining at longer distances. For a 1 kg animal undergoing a 60% reduction in velocity, predicted kinetic energy remaining immediately before contact increased from 4.80-5.14J at 20 m to 8.13-8.90 J at 80 m. This velocity reduction corresponded to a dissipation of 84% of approach kinetic energy before contact. Over a braking distance of 1 m, the required mean deceleration increased from 2.57-2.75 g at 20 m to 4.35-4.77 g at 80 m. At 80 m, shortening the braking distance from 4 to 0.5 m increased the required deceleration from 1.09-1.19 to 8.70-9.53 g. These results indicate that the absolute energetic and deceleration requirements of landing increase with glide distance, even when velocity is close to an asymptote. These results provide a quantitative basis for considering aerodynamic braking and landing requirements alongside conventional measures of glide performance. Summary statementModels quantify how glide distance, aerodynamic braking, and braking distance affect pre-contact kinetic energy and deceleration requirements in gliding mammals.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
"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.