Cargando…

A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth

The shape of the human female pelvis is thought to reflect an evolutionary trade-off between two competing demands: a pelvis wide enough to permit the birth of large-brained infants, and narrow enough for efficient bipedal locomotion. This trade-off, known as the obstetrical dilemma, is invoked to e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Warrener, Anna G., Lewton, Kristi L., Pontzer, Herman, Lieberman, Daniel E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4356512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25760381
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118903
_version_ 1782361015756783616
author Warrener, Anna G.
Lewton, Kristi L.
Pontzer, Herman
Lieberman, Daniel E.
author_facet Warrener, Anna G.
Lewton, Kristi L.
Pontzer, Herman
Lieberman, Daniel E.
author_sort Warrener, Anna G.
collection PubMed
description The shape of the human female pelvis is thought to reflect an evolutionary trade-off between two competing demands: a pelvis wide enough to permit the birth of large-brained infants, and narrow enough for efficient bipedal locomotion. This trade-off, known as the obstetrical dilemma, is invoked to explain the relative difficulty of human childbirth and differences in locomotor performance between men and women. The basis for the obstetrical dilemma is a standard static biomechanical model that predicts wider pelves in females increase the metabolic cost of locomotion by decreasing the effective mechanical advantage of the hip abductor muscles for pelvic stabilization during the single-leg support phase of walking and running, requiring these muscles to produce more force. Here we experimentally test this model against a more accurate dynamic model of hip abductor mechanics in men and women. The results show that pelvic width does not predict hip abductor mechanics or locomotor cost in either women or men, and that women and men are equally efficient at both walking and running. Since a wider birth canal does not increase a woman’s locomotor cost, and because selection for successful birthing must be strong, other factors affecting maternal pelvic and fetal size should be investigated in order to help explain the prevalence of birth complications caused by a neonate too large to fit through the birth canal.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4356512
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43565122015-03-17 A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth Warrener, Anna G. Lewton, Kristi L. Pontzer, Herman Lieberman, Daniel E. PLoS One Research Article The shape of the human female pelvis is thought to reflect an evolutionary trade-off between two competing demands: a pelvis wide enough to permit the birth of large-brained infants, and narrow enough for efficient bipedal locomotion. This trade-off, known as the obstetrical dilemma, is invoked to explain the relative difficulty of human childbirth and differences in locomotor performance between men and women. The basis for the obstetrical dilemma is a standard static biomechanical model that predicts wider pelves in females increase the metabolic cost of locomotion by decreasing the effective mechanical advantage of the hip abductor muscles for pelvic stabilization during the single-leg support phase of walking and running, requiring these muscles to produce more force. Here we experimentally test this model against a more accurate dynamic model of hip abductor mechanics in men and women. The results show that pelvic width does not predict hip abductor mechanics or locomotor cost in either women or men, and that women and men are equally efficient at both walking and running. Since a wider birth canal does not increase a woman’s locomotor cost, and because selection for successful birthing must be strong, other factors affecting maternal pelvic and fetal size should be investigated in order to help explain the prevalence of birth complications caused by a neonate too large to fit through the birth canal. Public Library of Science 2015-03-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4356512/ /pubmed/25760381 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118903 Text en © 2015 Warrener et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Warrener, Anna G.
Lewton, Kristi L.
Pontzer, Herman
Lieberman, Daniel E.
A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth
title A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth
title_full A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth
title_fullStr A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth
title_full_unstemmed A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth
title_short A Wider Pelvis Does Not Increase Locomotor Cost in Humans, with Implications for the Evolution of Childbirth
title_sort wider pelvis does not increase locomotor cost in humans, with implications for the evolution of childbirth
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4356512/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25760381
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118903
work_keys_str_mv AT warrenerannag awiderpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth
AT lewtonkristil awiderpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth
AT pontzerherman awiderpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth
AT liebermandaniele awiderpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth
AT warrenerannag widerpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth
AT lewtonkristil widerpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth
AT pontzerherman widerpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth
AT liebermandaniele widerpelvisdoesnotincreaselocomotorcostinhumanswithimplicationsfortheevolutionofchildbirth