4.7 Article

Walking is regulated by environmental temperature

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 11, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-91633-1

关键词

-

资金

  1. JSPS KAKENHI [20K12751]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20K12751] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that environmental temperature affects walking speed, step length, and cadence, with higher values observed in winter compared to summer. Cadence was most strongly correlated with daily maximum temperature in a curvilinear relationship. A decrease in environmental temperature below 30 degrees Celsius was found to increase cadence.
The mechanisms that regulate human walking are not fully understood, although there has been substantial research. In our study, we hypothesized that, although walking can be volitionally modified, it is also involuntary and controlled by evolutionary factors, such as the relationship between temperature and movement speed in poikilotherms. This study aimed to determine the effects of environmental temperature on speed, step length, and cadence during unrestrained walking over long periods. Customers of a private insurance company were asked to use a background smartphone GPS application that measured walking parameters. Participants were 1065 app users (298 men and 767 women) aged 14-86 years. Observed walking speed and cadence were higher in winter (average maximum temperature: 10.2 degrees C) than in summer (average maximum temperature: 29.8 degrees C) (p<0.001). The walking parameters were closely related to environmental temperature, with cadence most strongly correlated with daily maximum temperature (r=- 0.812, p<0.001) and indicating a curvilinear relationship. A decrease in environmental temperature was found to increase cadence when the temperature was below 30 degrees C. The findings suggest that walking may be regulated by environmental temperature and potentially by the autonomic nervous system's response to environmental temperature.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据