The fastest and most manoeuvrable terrestrial animals are found in savannah habitats, where predators chase and capture running prey. Hunt outcome and success rate are critical to survival, so both predator and prey should evolve to be faster and/or more manoeuvrable. Here we compare locomotor characteristics in two pursuit predator–prey pairs, lion–zebra and cheetah–impala, in their natural savannah habitat in Botswana. We show that although cheetahs and impalas were universally more athletic than lions and zebras in terms of speed, acceleration and turning, within each predator–prey pair, the predators had 20% higher muscle fibre power than prey, 37% greater acceleration and 72% greater deceleration capacity than their prey. We simulated hunt dynamics with these data and showed that hunts at lower speeds enable prey to use their maximum manoeuvring capacity and favour prey survival, and that the predator needs to be more athletic than its prey to sustain a viable success rate.
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $3.90 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Rent or Buy article
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Howland, H. C. Optimal strategies for predator avoidance: the relative importance of speed and manoeuvrability. J. Theor. Biol. 47, 333–350 (1974)
Moore, T. Y. & Biewener, A. A. Outrun or outmaneuver: Predator–prey interactions as a model system for integrating biomechanical studies in a broader ecological and evolutionary context. Integr. Comp. Biol. 55, 1188–1197 (2015)
Combes, S. A., Salcedo, M. K., Pandit, M. M. & Iwasaki, J. M. Capture success and efficiency of dragonflies pursuing different types of prey. Integr. Comp. Biol. 53, 787–798 (2013)
Domenici, P., Booth, D., Blagburn, J. M. & Bacon, J. P. Cockroaches keep predators guessing by using preferred escape trajectories. Curr. Biol. 18, 1792–1796 (2008)
Domenici, P., Blagburn, J. M. & Bacon, J. P. Animal escapology II: escape trajectory case studies. J. Exp. Biol. 214, 2474–2494 (2011)
Van Valen, L. A new evolutionary law. Evol. Theory 1, 1–30 (1973)
Benton, M. J. The Red Queen and the Court Jester: species diversity and the role of biotic and abiotic factors through time. Science 323, 728–732 (2009)
Bro-Jørgensen, J. Evolution of sprint speed in African savannah herbivores in relation to predation. Evolution 67, 3371–3376 (2013)
Wilson, A. M. et al. Locomotion dynamics of hunting in wild cheetahs. Nature 498, 185–189 (2013)
Irschick, D. J. & Higham, T. E. Animal Athletes: an Ecological and Evolutionary Approach (Oxford Univ. Press, 2015).
Broekhuis, F., Cozzi, G., Valeix, M., McNutt, J. W. & Macdonald, D. W. Risk avoidance in sympatric large carnivores: reactive or predictive? J. Anim. Ecol. 82, 1098–1105 (2013)
Schaller, G. B. The Serengeti Lion: A Study of Predator–Prey Relations (Univ. Chicago Press, 1972)
Curtin, N. A ., Woledge, R. C. & Aerts, P. Muscle directly meets the vast power demands in agile lizards. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 272, 581–584 (2005)
Kohn, T. A. & Noakes, T. D. Lion (Panthera leo) and caracal (Caracal caracal) type IIx single muscle fibre force and power exceed that of trained humans. J. Exp. Biol. 216, 960–969 (2013)
Williams, S. B., Tan, H., Usherwood, J. R. & Wilson, A. M. Pitch then power: limitations to acceleration in quadrupeds. Biol. Lett. 5, 610–613 (2009)
Carrier, D. R., Gregersen, C. S. & Silverton, N. A. Dynamic gearing in running dogs. J. Exp. Biol. 201, 3185–3195 (1998)
Tan, H. & Wilson, A. M. Grip and limb force limits to turning performance in competition horses. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 278, 2105–2111 (2011)
Usherwood, J. R. & Wilson, A. M. Biomechanics: no force limit on greyhound sprint speed. Nature 438, 753–754 (2005)
Daley, M. A. in Understanding Mammalian Locomotion: Concepts and Applications Ch. 11 (ed. Bertram, J. E. A. ) 277–306 (Wiley & Sons, 2016)
Wilson, J. W. et al. Cheetahs, Acinonyx jubatus, balance turn capacity with pace when chasing prey. Biol. Lett. 9, 20130620 (2013)
Jindrich, D. L., Smith, N. C., Jespers, K. & Wilson, A. M. Mechanics of cutting maneuvers by ostriches (Struthio camelus). J. Exp. Biol. 210, 1378–1390 (2007)
Curtin, N. A., Diack, R. A., West, T. G., Wilson, A. M. & Woledge, R. C. Skinned fibres produce the same power and force as intact fibre bundles from muscle of wild rabbits. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 2856–2863 (2015)
Rome, L. C., Sosnicki, A. A. & Goble, D. O. Maximum velocity of shortening of three fibre types from horse soleus muscle: implications for scaling with body size. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 431, 173–185 (1990)
Seow, C. Y. & Ford, L. E. Shortening velocity and power output of skinned muscle fibers from mammals having a 25,000-fold range of body mass. J. Gen. Physiol. 97, 541–560 (1991)
Hill, A. V. The dimensions of animals and their muscular dynamics. Science Progress 38, 209–230 (1950)
West, T. G. et al. Power output of skinned skeletal muscle fibres from the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus). J. Exp. Biol. 216, 2974–2982 (2013)
Crow, M. T. & Kushmerick, M. J. Chemical energetics of slow- and fast-twitch muscles of the mouse. J. Gen. Physiol. 79, 147–166 (1982)
Bartlam-Brooks, H. L., Bonyongo, M. C. & Harris, S. How landscape scale changes affect ecological processes in conservation areas: external factors influence land use by zebra (Equus burchelli) in the Okavango Delta. Ecol. Evol. 3, 2795–2805 (2013)
Schmidt-Nielsen, K. Desert Animals. Physiological Problems of Heat and Water (Clarendon, 1965).
Wilson, A. M., McGuigan, M. P., Su, A. & van Den Bogert, A. J. Horses damp the spring in their step. Nature 414, 895–899 (2001)
McGuigan, M. P. & Wilson, A. M. The effect of gait and digital flexor muscle activation on limb compliance in the forelimb of the horse Equus caballus. J. Exp. Biol. 206, 1325–1336 (2003)
Pasi, B. M. & Carrier, D. R. Functional trade-offs in the limb muscles of dogs selected for running vs. fighting. J. Evol. Biol. 16, 324–332 (2003)
Carrier, D. R., Anders, C. & Schilling, N. The musculoskeletal system of humans is not tuned to maximize the economy of locomotion. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 18631–18636 (2011)
Wynn, M. L., Clemente, C., Nasir, A. F. A. A. & Wilson, R. S. Running faster causes disaster: trade-offs between speed, manoeuvrability and motor control when running around corners in northern quolls (Dasyurus hallucatus). J. Exp. Biol. 218, 433–439 (2015)
Merz, A. The homicidal chauffeur. AIAA J. 12, 259–260 (1974). https://doi.org/10.2514/3.49215
Getz, W. & Pachter, M. Two-target pursuit–evasion differential games in the plane. J. Optim. Theory Appl. 34, 383–403 (1981)
Hubel, T. Y. et al. Energy cost and return for hunting in African wild dogs and cheetahs. Nat. Commun. 7, 11034 (2016)
Méndez, J. & Keys, A. Density and composition of mammalian muscle. Metabolism 9, 184–188 (1960)
Pinheiro, J. & Bates, D. Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS (Springer, 2000)
Ranatunga, K. W. Temperature dependence of mechanical power output in mammalian (rat) skeletal muscle. Exp. Physiol. 83, 371–376 (1998)
Barclay, C. J., Woledge, R. C. & Curtin, N. A. Is the efficiency of mammalian (mouse) skeletal muscle temperature dependent? J. Physiol. (Lond.) 588, 3819–3831 (2010)
Sikes, R. S. et al. 2016 Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research and education. J. Mamm. 97, 663–688 (2016)
Kalman, R. E. A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems. J. Basic Eng. 82, 35–45 (1960)
Titterton, D. & Weston, J. L. Strapdown Inertial Navigation Technology. 2 edn, Vol. 207 (AIAA, 2004)
Rauch, H. E., Striebel, C. & Tung, F. Maximum likelihood estimates of linear dynamic systems. AIAA J. 3, 1445–1450 (1965)
Dewhirst, O. P. et al. An exploratory clustering approach for extracting stride parameters from tracking collars on free ranging wild animals. J. Exp. Biol. 220, 341–346 (2017)
Davies, D. L. & Bouldin, D. W. A cluster separation measure. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. PAMI-1, 224–227 (1979)
Hubel, T. Y. et al. Additive opportunistic capture explains group hunting benefits in African wild dogs. Nat. Commun. 7, 11033 (2016)
Estes, R. D. The Behaviour Guide to African Mammals: including hoofed Mammals, Carnivores, Primates (Russell Friedman Books, 1991)
Nowak, R. M. Walker’s Mammals of the World Vol. 1 (JHU, 1999)
Williams, S. B., Wilson, A. M., Rhodes, L., Andrews, J. & Payne, R. C. Functional anatomy and muscle moment arms of the pelvic limb of an elite sprinting athlete: the racing greyhound (Canis familiaris). J. Anat. 213, 361–372 (2008)
Williams, S. B., Wilson, A. M., Daynes, J., Peckham, K. & Payne, R. C. Functional anatomy and muscle moment arms of the thoracic limb of an elite sprinting athlete: the racing greyhound (Canis familiaris). J. Anat. 213, 373–382 (2008)
Webster, E. L., Hudson, P. E. & Channon, S. B. Comparative functional anatomy of the epaxial musculature of dogs (Canis familiaris) bred for sprinting vs. fighting. J. Anat. 225, 317–327 (2014)
Hudson, P. E. et al. Functional anatomy of the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) forelimb. J. Anat. 218, 375–385 (2011)
Hudson, P. E. et al. Functional anatomy of the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) hindlimb. J. Anat. 218, 363–374 (2011)
Payne, R. C., Hutchinson, J. R., Robilliard, J. J., Smith, N. C. & Wilson, A. M. Functional specialisation of pelvic limb anatomy in horses (Equus caballus). J. Anat. 206, 557–574 (2005)
Payne, R. C., Veenman, P. & Wilson, A. M. The role of the extrinsic thoracic limb muscles in equine locomotion. J. Anat. 205, 479–490 (2004)
Crook, T. C. et al. Comparative anatomy and muscle architecture of selected hind limb muscles in the quarter horse and Arab. J. Anat. 212, 144–152 (2008)
Williams, S. B., Payne, R. C. & Wilson, A. M. Functional specialisation of the pelvic limb of the hare (Lepus europeus). J. Anat. 210, 472–490 (2007)
Williams, S. B., Wilson, A. M. & Payne, R. C. Functional specialisation of the thoracic limb of the hare (Lepus europeus). J. Anat. 210, 491–505 (2007)
Smith, N. C., Wilson, A. M., Jespers, K. J. & Payne, R. C. Muscle architecture and functional anatomy of the pelvic limb of the ostrich (Struthio camelus). J. Anat. 209, 765–779 (2006)
Schaller, N. U. Structural Attributes contributing to Locomotor Performance in the Ostrich. PhD thesis, Univ. Heidelberg (2008)
Cuff, A. R. et al. The scaling of postcranial muscles in cats (Felidae) II: hindlimb and lumbosacral muscles. J. Anat. 229, 142–152 (2016)
Cuff, A. R. et al. The scaling of postcranial muscles in cats (Felidae) I: forelimb, cervical, and thoracic muscles. J. Anat. 229, 128–141 (2016)
Holland, R ., Loveday, D. & Ferguson, K. How much meat to expect from a beef carcass. http://extension.tennessee.edu/publications/Documents/PB1822.pdf (Univ. Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture, 2014)
Sacks, R. D. & Roy, R. R. Architecture of the hind limb muscles of cats: functional significance. J. Morphol. 173, 185–195 (1982)
Shahar, R. & Milgram, J. Morphometric and anatomic study of the hind limb of a dog. Am. J. Vet. Res. 62, 928–933 (2001)
Gunn, H. M. Muscle, bone and fat proportions and muscle distribution of thoroughbreds and other horses. In Proc. 2nd ICEEP Equine Exercise Physiology (Gillespie, J. R. & Robinson, N. E.) 253–264 (ICEEP, 1988)
Alexander, R. M. Principles of Animal Locomotion (Princeton Univ. Press, 2003)
Lindstedt, S. L., LaStayo, P. C. & Reich, T. E. When active muscles lengthen: properties and consequences of eccentric contractions. News Physiol. Sci. 16, 256–261 (2001)
Roberts, T. J. & Azizi, E. The series-elastic shock absorber: tendons attenuate muscle power during eccentric actions. J. Appl. Physiol. 109, 396–404 (2010)
Abbott, B. C., Bigland, B. & Ritchie, J. M. The physiological cost of negative work. J. Physiol. (Lond.) 117, 380–390 (1952)
We thank S. Amos for fabricating collars, N. Jordan and G. Gilfillan, M. Claase and N. Terry and BPCT research assistants for working with us in the study area and M. Flyman (DWNP) for his support and enthusiasm; J. Usherwood, R. Bomphrey and A. R. Wilson for comments on the manuscript; EPSRC (EP/H013016/1), BBSRC (BB/J018007/1) and ERC (323041) for funding. The Botswana Predator Conservation Trust was supported by private donors, Tusk Trust and the Cincinnati Zoo. Work was approved by RVC Ethics & Welfare Committee (RVC 2013 1233) and Botswana Department of Wildlife and National Parks Research Permits were held by J.W.M. and A.M.W. (EWT 8/36/4 plus additions) and a Botswana Veterinary Registration held by A.M.W. Tissue shipping was covered by CITES, Botswana export, Botswana National Veterinary Laboratory approval, South African transit and UK DEFRA import permits.
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Reviewer Information Nature thanks A. Biewener and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Extended data figures and tables
a, Example manoeuvring sequence for a cheetah showing position based on fused GPS-IMU data (250 Hz) colour-coded according to speed and segmented for clarity (1–5, duplicated in b–e). b, Speed based on fused GPS-IMU data (250 Hz). c–e, Stride-wise values for speed (averaged over stride), tangential (fore–aft) acceleration (change in stride speed/stride durations) and centripetal (lateral) acceleration ((change in heading/stride duration) × stride speed). f, Details on the animals used and datasets collected. Reduced dataset of non-steady state stride used for analysis of maximum performance. Note, the number of strides and distance per run was based on all strides (steady-state included).
a–c, Time course of stress (force) development in a single skinned impala fibre, showing transition of the fibre through pre-activation, activation and relaxation solutions, and stress development after temperature jump (T-jump) from 1 to 25 °C. The sample rate was 5 kHz. The grey noisy parts of the stress trace denote periods of solution change. The four downward ‘spikes’ in the stress record (at 9, 10, 11 and 12 s) are distinct periods of force control, where the fibre length was first rapidly reduced from Lo and then reduced at an appropriate rate to maintain force at pre-defined sub-maximal levels. The broken-line box in a surrounds the first episode of force control and is presented in b and c on an expanded time scale. b Relative force (F/Fisom) was reduced to 40% of the maximum for 20 ms, where F indicates force during shortening, Fisom indicates isometric force. Isometric force (Fisom) and the force during force clamp (F) were recorded as average values for the central 10-ms intervals (vertical lines). A force measurement, Fisom, was recorded just before each of the four force-control events and used in the calculation of F/Fisom. c, Shortening speed (in Lo s−1) was derived from the rate of change in fibre length during each force clamp. At the end of the force clamp, fibre length was ‘quick-released’ to a slack length (70% of Lo), where force was reduced to the zero baseline. After 10 ms at slack length, the motor lengthened the fibre back to the starting length (Lo), isometric stress was re-established (as shown in a) and another force control event was initiated. d, Twelve points on a power–force relationship could be obtained from three temperature jump activations of a single fibre. The curves were fitted (see Methods) to give relative power (power/FisomLo (in s−1)) as a function of relative force (F/Fisom). Expressing both variables in relative units is important for the curve-fitting process, mainly because the measurements of Fisom often vary between and within activations; in the example shown in a there was a small reduction in Fisom through the activation at 25°C. e, Peak isometric force relative to fibre cross-sectional area (CSA) for fibres from the four species. f, Power output relative to fibre volume. There was a distinct subpopulation of low-performance fibres (mostly from lion and zebra) that displayed lower power at a given fibre volume. Fibres with a shortening velocity at peak power of <1.35 Lo s−1 (see also Fig. 2c) were classified as low performance. g, Peak power relative to stress at peak power. The low performing fibres also had stress at peak power values that were relatively low—the data points below the thin dashed black line have velocities of shortening <1.35 Lo s−1. h, The variability in stress at peak power was similar across the species tested. i, Details about the muscle fibres. Mean (±s.e.m.) mechanical features for single skinned skeletal muscle fibres from biceps femoris of cheetah, lion, impala and zebra. Mean values are also categorized for the predator and prey groups, and further as the high-performing sub-groups of fibres (high-performing fibres had optimal shortening speeds >1.35 Lo s−1, see main text and Extended Data Fig. 2f, g, i).
a, b, Histograms of all strides (a) and extracted non-steady state strides (b), for which the cut-off was species-specific based on their kurtosis. The x axis is the normalized and squared horizontal acceleration in arbitrary units (that is, combined tangential and centripetal). In b, on the x axis, the cut-off is zero and the 98th percentile is one. Cheetah, blue; impala, red; lion, purple; zebra, yellow. Removing steady-state strides delivers a similar distribution tail for all four species. This is critical for deriving an appropriate 98th percentile, as this should be equally representative in all four species. c, Histogram of maximum stride parameters recorded in each run (speed, centripetal and tangential acceleration) for each species. Colour-coded by individuals, n is the number of runs used for data extraction. One concern of the comparison between predator and prey species is the potential lack of high-performance runs in prey species due to the low number of actual one-on-one chases. However, the distribution of the performance data shows that the cheetah and impala data include a considerably higher proportion of high-performance runs, whereas the lion and zebra dataset includes a large percentage of slower runs. Recognizing that the species differ in run characteristics (motivation, proportion of steady-state versus non-steady-state strides), we removed steady-state strides, based on the species-specific kurtosis, resulting in a comparable distribution in all four species (see Methods).
Extended Data Figure 4 Performance metrics separated by individual and species plotted against run distance and against run tortuosity.
Maximum accelerations and speeds were extracted from each run and displayed versus distance covered during the run and versus tortuosity of the run. Tortuosity is the ratio of distance covered in a run to net displacement (distance between start and end of the run). Markers are colour-coded per individual, dashed black line maximum values are based on 98th percentile. Number of runs (data points) are given in Extended Data Fig. 1f. Cheetah, 520 runs; impala, 515 runs; lion, 2,726 runs; zebra, 1,801 runs.
a, Cheetah. b, Impala. d, Lion. e, Zebra. a, b, d, e, Dots indicate the data points and the line marks the 98th percentile for data in speed bins as shown in Fig. 3a, b, d, e. Markers are colour-coded by individual, the solid black line is the 98th percentile. c, f, Comparison of the predator–prey pairs. c, Cheetah–impala. f, Lion–zebra. g, Comparison of the predator species (lion–cheetah). h, Comparison of the herbivore species (impala–zebra). i, The 98th percentile for all four species. c, f–i, Data are colour-coded by species (key is shown in i). In all four species maximum negative power was similar to maximum positive power. Muscle stress can be considerably higher when performing negative work than positive work70,71 and a 60% higher fascicle power in lengthening (rather than shortening) has been reported71, so mass-specific muscle power can be much higher in deceleration72. Body geometry relative to the ground reaction force vector or grip may limit the attainable horizontal ground reaction force15 and the muscles need to be arranged to lengthen while experiencing the large horizontal forces. Many of the propulsive muscles are hip retractors (Extended Data Table 1), which are not configured to resist forward motion.
a, Cheetah. b, Impala. d, Lion. e, Zebra. Dots indicate the data points and the line marks the 98th percentile for data in speed bins as shown in Fig. 3a, b, d, e. Markers are colour-coded by individual, the solid black line is the 98th percentile. c, f, Comparison of the predator–prey pairs. c, Cheetah–impala. f, Lion–zebra. g, Comparison of the predator species (lion–cheetah). h, Comparison of the herbivore species (impala–zebra). i, The 98th percentile for all four species. c, f–i, Data are colour-coded by species (key is shown in i).
This is the same as Fig. 3, but the ratios compare the two predators and the two prey species. All values are averaged per stride or represent the change over a stride. a–e, Acceleration. a, Positive net work performed in each stride. b, Stride frequency. c, Stride power. d, Increase in speed per stride. e, Forward acceleration with the curved lines representing a mean power of 30, 60, 90, 120 and 150 W. f–j, Deceleration. f–j, As a–e but for decelerating strides. k–n, Turning. k, Centripetal acceleration. l, The relationship between speed and turn radius with limit lines for a coefficient of friction (μ) of 0.6 and 1.3. m, Change in heading versus speed. n, Lateral versus tangential acceleration with limits as for μ. In n, F represents pure forward acceleration; B, deceleration; and C, acceleration to the side. In each panel, there is one line per species that represents the 98th percentile for data in speed bins (bins always include 400 data points, therefore bin width varies). Cheetah, blue; impala, red; lion, purple; zebra, yellow. Bottom, the ratio of that parameter for cheetah to lion (green circle) and impala to zebra (magenta circle) is given for each speed bin.
Extended Data Figure 8 Output of model of predator–prey interaction and impact of performance differential on hunt outcome.
See also Fig. 4. a, b, Plot showing output of simulation. a and b are equivalent to Fig. 4d with more subplots for cheetah–impala and lion–zebra, respectively. At the start of simulation, both have initial velocity towards the top of the page and initial separation. After one stride the prey can move to anywhere in the red or yellow ellipse by acceleration in the appropriate direction. Predator velocity remains unchanged, as there is no prey acceleration in the previous stride to react to. Initial positions are shown. Larger red or yellow ellipse perimeter is the area prey can reach after two strides of the chosen maximum acceleration. The blue or purple filled ellipse represents the locations the predator can occupy after its second stride (responding to the prey acceleration observed in first stride). The area of the prey ellipse that is covered by the predator ellipse line is defined as probability of capture. Predator is given a starting speed for each combination of prey speed and initial spacing that maximizes the capture probability. Rows are different initial prey speeds, values in red to the left of each row. Columns are different initial predator–prey separations at the start of the simulation with values given in red below each column. Scale for all instances is given in the bottom left plot in metres (in black). The inset black numbers in each sub-panel are the initial (optimized for maximum success) predator speeds in m s−1. c, The optimum lion speed to maximize overlap (hotter colours indicate faster speed, key on the right) as a function of zebra speed (x axis) and starting separation (y axis). The histogram above the main plot shows the distribution of actual zebra speed at first turn of 10 degrees or more for each run (same x axis as the main plot) and the vertical histogram shows distribution of actual lion speed at first turn (scale as for heat bar). d, The proportional overlap (capture probability), as a function of zebra initial speed and starting separation. e, Modelled capacity for forward acceleration (speed increase per stride) as a function of speed (Extended Data Table 2b). Cheetah, blue; impala, red; lion, purple; zebra, yellow.
This file contains a description about collar design, collar data recording and collar performance with references. (PDF 146 kb)
This file contains muscle data. (CSV 23 kb)
This file contains stride data. (CSV 4837 kb)
This file contains three python codes and a supplementary guide for the python codes. (ZIP 95 kb)
About this article
Cite this article
Wilson, A., Hubel, T., Wilshin, S. et al. Biomechanics of predator–prey arms race in lion, zebra, cheetah and impala. Nature 554, 183–188 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25479
Kinesiology Review (2020)
Current Biology (2020)
Mammal Review (2020)
Animal Behaviour (2020)
The uneven weight distribution between predators and prey: Comparing gut fill between terrestrial herbivores and carnivores
Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular & Integrative Physiology (2020)