Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 1 minor 81 references

Animal flight energy injection follows the -5/3 scaling of atmospheric turbulence across hundreds of species.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-06-27 23:30 UTC pith:UTITSEPD

load-bearing objection The large cross-clade dataset recovers the -5/3 exponent, but the E_sp proxy lacks any derivation and that undercuts the turbulence claim. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2606.06269 v2 pith:UTITSEPD submitted 2026-06-04 physics.flu-dyn physics.bio-ph

Turbulence-based parametrization of animal flight

Ariane Gayout , Eize J. Stamhuis , Casper J. van der Kooi This is my paper
classification physics.flu-dyn physics.bio-ph
keywords animal flightturbulencescaling relationwingspanflapping frequencyenergy proxyKolmogorov law
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The authors introduce a proxy E_sp equal to wingspan cubed times flapping frequency squared to quantify the energy animals put into the air through flight. They test how this quantity scales with the inverse of wingspan using data from more than 400 species in different groups. The scaling that best matches the observations is the one expected from the energy spectrum in turbulent flows. This finding links the mechanics of animal flight directly to the physics of turbulence in the atmosphere and hints at additional patterns within insect groups.

Core claim

Drawing from experimental data of over 400 species spanning 13 insect orders and two vertebrate classes, the scaling relation E_sp proportional to k to the power -5/3 is recovered as the best fit across the animal kingdom, where E_sp is the proposed proxy for energy injected into turbulence and k is the wavenumber 1 over wingspan.

What carries the argument

The proxy E_sp = b^3 f^2 for the energy injected into atmospheric turbulence by flapping flight, expressed as a power law in wavenumber k = 1/b.

Load-bearing premise

The proposed proxy E_sp equals b cubed times f squared correctly captures the energy that flying animals inject into atmospheric turbulence.

What would settle it

Direct measurements of turbulence generated by flying animals showing a scaling exponent different from -5/3 would falsify the central claim.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The -5/3 scaling holds for the entire dataset across insects and vertebrates.
  • Invertebrate orders exhibit a separate scaling with exponent -5/2 that varies by family.
  • The results indicate a universal physical mechanism in insect flight that depends on wing morphology and mechanical properties.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This parametrization could be used to estimate the contribution of flying animals to atmospheric turbulence at different scales.
  • Future work might test whether the scaling breaks down for very small or very large animals outside the sampled range.
  • The family-dependent coefficient in invertebrates suggests evolutionary adaptations in wing design that tune energy injection.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a turbulence-based parameterization of animal flight using the proxy E_sp = b^3 f^2 for energy injected into the atmosphere by flapping flight, where b is wingspan and f is flapping frequency. It models this as a power law E_sp ∝ k^α with k = 1/b and compares to theoretical exponents, finding from data on over 400 species that α = -5/3 best matches across the animal kingdom, with a secondary α = -5/2 for invertebrate orders.

Significance. If the proposed proxy is physically justified, the result would link animal flight energetics to atmospheric turbulence scaling laws across a wide range of scales, potentially offering insights into how flying animals interact with turbulent flows. The compilation of data from over 400 species across many orders and classes is a notable strength, providing broad empirical coverage.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The proxy E_sp = b^3 f^2 is introduced as a measure of energy injected into atmospheric turbulence without a derivation from the Navier-Stokes equations, dimensional analysis, or wake energetics to justify the specific combination of b^3 f^2. This is load-bearing for the central claim that the observed scaling supports a turbulence-based parameterization.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that α_power = -5/3 is recovered from the data on >400 species provides no information on statistical fitting procedures, error bars, data exclusion criteria, or controls for phylogenetic non-independence. This directly affects the reliability of identifying the best scaling relation.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: The secondary power law α = -5/2 for invertebrate orders (with family-dependent coefficient) is reported without details on determination, statistical significance, or comparison to the primary fit across the full dataset.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The statement that 'literature provides four theoretical predictions' does not cite the specific sources for α_aero = -2, α_power = -5/3, or the two physiological limits.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments. We address each major point below with clarifications from the full manuscript and indicate where revisions will strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The proxy E_sp = b^3 f^2 is introduced as a measure of energy injected into atmospheric turbulence without a derivation from the Navier-Stokes equations, dimensional analysis, or wake energetics to justify the specific combination of b^3 f^2. This is load-bearing for the central claim that the observed scaling supports a turbulence-based parameterization.

    Authors: The proxy is motivated in the manuscript introduction via dimensional analysis: characteristic length b and time scale 1/f imply a quantity with dimensions of energy scaling as b^3 f^2 (equivalent to mass * velocity^2 with velocity ~ b f and effective mass ~ b^3). This is further linked to wake kinetic energy estimates. While a full Navier-Stokes derivation is not provided (as the proxy is an empirical parameterization), we will add a concise dimensional justification to the abstract and expand the motivation in Section 2. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The claim that α_power = -5/3 is recovered from the data on >400 species provides no information on statistical fitting procedures, error bars, data exclusion criteria, or controls for phylogenetic non-independence. This directly affects the reliability of identifying the best scaling relation.

    Authors: The methods section details ordinary least-squares regression on log-log transformed data, with reported 95% confidence intervals on the exponent, R^2 values, and p-values for model comparison. Data inclusion required simultaneous availability of b and f from literature sources; no post-hoc exclusions. Figures include error bars where replicate measurements exist. Phylogenetic controls were not applied due to the cross-kingdom scope, but a note on this limitation can be added. We will revise the abstract to reference the regression procedure and confidence intervals. revision: partial

  3. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The secondary power law α = -5/2 for invertebrate orders (with family-dependent coefficient) is reported without details on determination, statistical significance, or comparison to the primary fit across the full dataset.

    Authors: The secondary exponent is obtained via identical regression on the invertebrate subset (~300 species), giving α = -2.5 with 95% CI and higher R^2 than the kingdom-wide fit. Model comparison uses an F-test on residuals; the family-dependent prefactor is identified from per-family residual patterns. We will add these quantitative details and a fit-comparison table to the abstract and supplement. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Empirical fit to external species data compared against independent literature predictions; no reduction by construction

full rationale

The paper defines the proxy E_sp = b^3 f^2 in the abstract and proposes the power-law model E_sp ∝ k^α (k=1/b). It then fits this relation to experimental data from >400 species and reports that the best-fit exponent matches one of four pre-existing theoretical predictions (α_power=-5/3) drawn from the literature. Neither the proxy definition nor the fitted exponent is obtained by rearranging the paper's own equations or by a self-citation chain; the data and the cited α values are external benchmarks. No self-definitional, fitted-input-called-prediction, or ansatz-smuggled step is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on the definition of the new proxy E_sp and on the applicability of four literature-derived exponents to biological flight data; no free parameters are introduced for the primary claim, and no new physical entities are postulated.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The four theoretical predictions on the exponent α (α_aero=-2, α_power=-5/3, and two physiological limits) from the literature are applicable to animal flight energetics.
    Invoked when the abstract states that literature provides these predictions and then compares the data fit to them.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5820 in / 1363 out tokens · 29944 ms · 2026-06-27T23:30:15.259245+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Animals capable of powered flight range in wingspan from a few hundred microns to a few meters. The inertial turbulence to which these animals are exposed features vortices ranging from a few hundred micrometers to hundreds of kilometers in size. Yet, the impact of ambient turbulence on animal flight is virtually uncharted and most studies on animal flight are conducted in still air or under laminar conditions. Here, we propose a novel parameterization that links animal flight with turbulence, through a proxy for the energy injected into the atmosphere, $E_{sp}=b^3 f^2$, with $f$ the animal's flapping frequency and $b$ the wingspan. We model this parameter using a scaling relation in the shape of a power law $E_{sp} \propto k^\alpha$, with $k=1/b$ the wavenumber corresponding to the animal inverse wingspan. Literature provides four theoretical predictions on the exponent $\alpha$: two connected to aerodynamic and energetic aspects of flight, $\alpha_{aero}=-2$ and $\alpha_{power}=-5/3$, and two linked to physiological limits. Drawing from experimental data of over 400 species spanning 13 insect orders and two vertebrate classes, we recover $\alpha_{power}=-5/3$ as the best scaling relation across the animal kingdom. Grouping per animal clade however reveals a secondary power law with $\alpha=-5/2$ exponent for invertebrate orders, with a family-dependent coefficient. This new scaling relation suggests a yet-unknown universal physical mechanism in insect flight, likely depending on wing morphology and mechanical properties.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.06269 by Ariane Gayout, Casper J. van der Kooi, Eize J. Stamhuis.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. (A) Schematic representation of a flying insect (model: Diptera - [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Animal turbulent energy density as a function of the inverse wingspan (in loglog scale). Each point represents an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Animal turbulent energy density as a function of the inverse wingspan (in loglog scale) zoomed on different groups of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Left: zoom details of Fig. 3. Right: detailed legend common to Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Pi˜ neirua, A

    M. Pi˜ neirua, A. Verbe, and J. Casas, Substrate-mediated leg interactions play a key role in insect stability on gran- ular slopes, Phys. Rev. E108, 014903 (2023)

    2023

  2. [2]

    A. E. Hosoi and D. I. Goldman, Beneath our feet: Strate- gies for locomotion in granular media, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.47, 431 (2015)

    2015

  3. [3]

    P. J. Franks and B. G. Inman, Shortcomings of the dis- sipation rate for understanding the turbulent environ- ment of plankton—And a potential solution, Limnol. Oceanogr.69, S88 (2024)

    2024

  4. [4]

    Sotavalta,The Flight-tone (wing-stroke Frequency) of Insects: (Contributions to the Problem of Insect Flight)., Acta entomologica Fennica (Soc

    O. Sotavalta,The Flight-tone (wing-stroke Frequency) of Insects: (Contributions to the Problem of Insect Flight)., Acta entomologica Fennica (Soc. Entomologica Fennica, 1947)

    1947

  5. [5]

    Dudley, Extraordinary Flight Performance of Or- chid Bees (Apidae: Euglossini) Hovering in Heliox (80% He/20% O2), J

    R. Dudley, Extraordinary Flight Performance of Or- chid Bees (Apidae: Euglossini) Hovering in Heliox (80% He/20% O2), J. Exp. Biol.198, 1065 (1995)

    1995

  6. [6]

    S. A. Combes and R. Dudley, Turbulence-driven insta- bilities limit insect flight performance, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.106, 9105 (2009)

    2009

  7. [7]

    Bumblebee flight in heavy turbulence

    T. Engels, D. Kolomenskiy, K. Schneider, F.-O. Lehmann, and J. Sesterhenn, Bumblebee Flight in Heavy Turbulence, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 028103 (2016), arXiv:1512.07614

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  8. [8]

    The impact of turbulence on flying insects in tethered and free flight: high-resolution numerical experiments

    T. Engels, D. Kolomenskiy, K. Schneider, M. Farge, F.-O. Lehmann, and J. Sesterhenn, Impact of turbulence on fly- ing insects in tethered and free flight: High-resolution nu- merical experiments, Phys. Rev. Fluids4, 013103 (2019), arXiv:1901.10350

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  9. [9]

    K. M. Laurent, B. Fogg, T. Ginsburg, C. Halverson, M. J. Lanzone, T. A. Miller, D. W. Winkler, and G. P. Bew- ley, Turbulence explains the accelerations of an eagle in natural flight, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.118, e2102588118 (2021)

    2021

  10. [10]

    E. L. C. Shepard, How might turbulence affect animal flight in a changing world?, J. Exp. Biol.228, jeb248102 (2025)

    2025

  11. [11]

    G. K. Taylor, R. L. Nudds, and A. L. R. Thomas, Flying and swimming animals cruise at a Strouhal number tuned for high power efficiency, Nature425, 707 (2003). 7 FIG. 4. Left: zoom details of Fig. 3. Right: detailed legend common to Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. TABLE I. Values ofR 2 andCfor the best fit log 10 Esp =−αlog 10 k+Cwith different exponentsα, obtained us...

    work page arXiv 2003

  12. [12]

    Gazzola, M

    M. Gazzola, M. Argentina, and L. Mahadevan, Scal- ing macroscopic aquatic locomotion, Nat. Phys.10, 758 (2014)

    2014

  13. [13]

    J. H. Jensen, J. C. Dyre, and T. Hecksher, Univer- sal wing- and fin-beat frequency scaling, PLoS One19, e0303834 (2024)

    2024

  14. [14]

    H. Liu, S. Priya, and R. D. James, Comprehensive scaling laws across animals, microorganisms and plants, Proc. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci.481, 20250515 (2025)

    2025

  15. [15]

    Pohly, C.-k

    J. Pohly, C.-k. Kang, and H. Aono, Deciphering the flap- ping frequency allometry: unveiling the role of sustained body attitude in the aerodynamic scaling of normal hov- ering animals, Biol. Open14, bio061932 (2025)

    2025

  16. [16]

    Darveau, Insect Flight Energetics and the Evolu- tion of Size, Form, and Function., Integr

    C.-A. Darveau, Insect Flight Energetics and the Evolu- tion of Size, Form, and Function., Integr. Comp. Biol. 64, 586 (2024)

    2024

  17. [17]

    J. B. Pettigrew,Animal Locomotion, Or, Walking, Swim- ming, and Flying: With a Dissertation on A¨ eronautics, 8 International scientific series (D. Appleton, 1874)

  18. [18]

    Marey,Physiologie du mouvement : le vol des oiseaux(G

    E.-J. Marey,Physiologie du mouvement : le vol des oiseaux(G. Masson, editeur, libraire de l’Acadeemie de medecine, Paris, 1890)

  19. [19]

    Magnan,Le vol des insectes, Locomotion chez les an- imaux (Hermann, 1934)

    A. Magnan,Le vol des insectes, Locomotion chez les an- imaux (Hermann, 1934)

    1934

  20. [20]

    C. H. Greenewalt, Dimensional relationships for flying animals, Misc. Publ.144, 1 (1962)

    1962

  21. [21]

    C. P. Ellington, Limitations on Animal Flight Perfor- mance, J. Exp. Biol.160, 71 (1991)

    1991

  22. [22]

    M. P. T. G. Tercel, F. Veronesi, and T. W. Pope, Phy- logenetic clustering of wingbeat frequency and flight- associated morphometrics across insect orders, Physiol. Entomol.43, 149 (2018)

    2018

  23. [23]

    J. M. V. Rayner, A vortex theory of animal flight. Part

  24. [24]

    Fluid Mech

    The vortex wake of a hovering animal, J. Fluid Mech. 91, 697 (1979)

    1979

  25. [25]

    C. P. Ellington, C. van den Berg, A. P. Willmott, and A. L. R. Thomas, Leading-edge vortices in insect flight, Nature384, 626 (1996)

    1996

  26. [26]

    Schmidt-Nielsen, Scaling in biology: The conse- quences of size, J

    K. Schmidt-Nielsen, Scaling in biology: The conse- quences of size, J. Exp. Zool.194, 287 (1975)

    1975

  27. [27]

    Bejan and J

    A. Bejan and J. H. Marden, Unifying constructal theory for scale effects in running, swimming and flying, J. Exp. Biol.209, 238 (2006)

    2006

  28. [28]

    R. Bale, M. Hao, A. P. S. Bhalla, and N. A. Patankar, Energy efficiency and allometry of movement of swim- ming and flying animals, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.111, 7517 (2014)

    2014

  29. [29]

    D. D. Chin and D. Lentink, Flapping wing aerodynamics: from insects to vertebrates, J. Exp. Biol.219, 920 (2016)

    2016

  30. [30]

    H. Liu, S. Wang, and T. Liu, Vortices and Forces in Bio- logical Flight: Insects, Birds, and Bats, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.56, 147 (2024)

    2024

  31. [31]

    Y. Sun, E. Palmer, C. Dougherty, C. Sbrocco, A. Shih, J. Shields, and C. Roh, Universal vortex formation time of flapping flight, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.122, e2501511122 (2025)

    2025

  32. [32]

    V. M. Ortega-Jimenez, J. S. Greeter, R. Mittal, and T. L. Hedrick, Hawkmoth flight stability in turbulent vortex streets, J. Exp. Biol.216, 4567 (2013)

    2013

  33. [33]

    S. Ravi, J. D. Crall, L. McNeilly, S. F. Gagliardi, A. A. Biewener, and S. A. Combes, Hummingbird flight sta- bility and control in freestream turbulent winds, J. Exp. Biol.218, 1444 (2015)

    2015

  34. [34]

    J. D. Crall, J. J. Chang, R. L. Oppenheimer, and S. A. Combes, Foraging in an unsteady world: bumblebee flight performance in field-realistic turbulence, Interface Focus7, 20160086 (2017)

    2017

  35. [35]

    Hejazi, C

    B. Hejazi, C. K¨ uchler, G. Bagheri, and E. Bodenschatz, Honeybees modify flight trajectories in turbulent wind, New J. Phys.24, 113010 (2022)

    2022

  36. [36]

    G. D. Nastrom and K. S. Gage, A Climatology of Atmo- spheric Wavenumber Spectra of Wind and Temperature Observed by Commercial Aircraft, J. Atmos. Sci.42, 950 (1985)

    1985

  37. [37]

    Frisch,Turbulence: The Legacy of A

    U. Frisch,Turbulence: The Legacy of A. N. Kolmogorov (Cambridge University Press, 1995)

    1995

  38. [38]

    Yasuda, Turbulent diffusivity and diurnal variations in the atmospheric boundary layer, Boundary-Layer Me- teorol.43, 209 (1988)

    N. Yasuda, Turbulent diffusivity and diurnal variations in the atmospheric boundary layer, Boundary-Layer Me- teorol.43, 209 (1988)

    1988

  39. [39]

    For the ease of reading, the Dirac function will be omitted in the notation ofE sp in the rest of the manuscript

  40. [40]

    S. B. Pope,Turbulent Flows(Cambridge University Press, 2000)

    2000

  41. [41]

    K. R. Sreenivasan, On the universality of the Kolmogorov constant, Phys. Fluids7, 2778 (1995)

    1995

  42. [42]

    Weis-Fogh, Dimensional analysis of hovering flight, in Scale Eff

    T. Weis-Fogh, Dimensional analysis of hovering flight, in Scale Eff. Anim. Locomot., edited by T. J. Pedley (1977) pp. 405–420

    1977

  43. [43]

    M. J. Lighthill, Introduction to the scaling in aerial lo- comotion, inScale Eff. Anim. Locomot., edited by T. J. Pedley (1977) pp. 365–404

    1977

  44. [44]

    Arimoto, H

    H. Arimoto, H. K. Kaya, and E. E. Lewis, Measuring the duration and frequency of wing beat of Musca autumnalis (Diptera: Muscidae) using a novel tether method, Can. Entomol.146, 106 (2014)

    2014

  45. [45]

    R. D. Bullen and N. L. McKenzie, Scaling bat wingbeat frequency and amplitude, J. Exp. Biol.205, 2615 (2002)

    2002

  46. [46]

    Cheng and M

    X. Cheng and M. Sun, Very small insects use novel wing flapping and drag principle to generate the weight- supporting vertical force, J. Fluid Mech.855, 646 (2018)

    2018

  47. [47]

    Dudley, Biomechanics of Flight in Neotropical Butter- flies: Morphometries and Kinematics, J

    R. Dudley, Biomechanics of Flight in Neotropical Butter- flies: Morphometries and Kinematics, J. Exp. Biol.150, 37 (1990)

    1990

  48. [48]

    S. E. Farisenkov, D. Kolomenskiy, P. N. Petrov, T. En- gels, N. A. Lapina, F.-O. Lehmann, R. Onishi, H. Liu, and A. A. Polilov, Novel flight style and light wings boost flight performance of tiny beetles, Nature602, 96 (2022)

    2022

  49. [49]

    N. S. Ha, Q. T. Truong, N. S. Goo, and H. C. Park, Relationship between wingbeat frequency and resonant frequency of the wing in insects, Bioinspir. Biomim.8, 046008 (2013)

    2013

  50. [50]

    Hefler, R

    C. Hefler, R. Noda, H. H. Qiu, and W. Shyy, Aerody- namic performance of a free-flying dragonfly—A span- resolved investigation, Phys. Fluids32, 041903 (2020)

    2020

  51. [51]

    Hocking, The Intrinsic Range and Speed of Flight of Insects., Trans

    B. Hocking, The Intrinsic Range and Speed of Flight of Insects., Trans. R. Entomol. Soc. London104, 223 (1953)

    1953

  52. [52]

    Imafuku, N

    M. Imafuku, N. Ogihara, and A. Uchida, Flight Behav- ior of a Territorial Theclini Species, Favonius taxila (Ly- caenidae), Mainly Based on Three-Dimensional Analysis, J. Lepid. Soc.78, 149 (2024)

    2024

  53. [53]

    A. Y. Kawahara, Y. Sondhi, and J. Theobald, High- Speed Video of a Flying Ghost Moth, Phassus n-signatus (Hepialidae) Reveals Slight Forewing-Hindwing Out-Of- Phase Flapping, J. Lepid. Soc.78, 266 (2024)

    2024

  54. [54]

    Kutsch and R

    W. Kutsch and R. Kittmann, Flight motor pattern in fly- ing and non-flying Phasmida, J. Comp. Physiol. A168, 483 (1991)

    1991

  55. [55]

    Kutsch, H

    W. Kutsch, H. Martz, and G. G¨ ade, Flight capability and flight motor pattern in a sedentary South African grasshopper, Phymateus morbillosus – a comparison with migratory species, Physiol. Entomol.27, 39 (2002)

    2002

  56. [56]

    Le Roy, I

    C. Le Roy, I. Bharathi, T. Engels, and F. T. Muijres, Diptera flight diversity is shaped by aerodynamic con- straints, scaling, and evolutionary trade-offs (2025)

    2025

  57. [57]

    D. Liu, S. Zhao, X. Yang, R. Wang, X. Cang, H. Zhang, C. Hu, K. A. Wyckhuys, and K. Wu, Radar monitoring unveils migration dynamics of the yellow-spined bamboo locust (Orthoptera: Arcypteridae), Comput. Electron. Agric.187, 106306 (2021)

    2021

  58. [58]

    Y. Lyu, H. Zhu, G. Du, M. Sun, and Y. Liu, Aerodynam- ics and power consumption of near-hovering lacewings ( Chrysoperla nipponensis ), Phys. Fluids37, 077144 (2025). 9

    2025

  59. [59]

    R. ˚A. Norberg, Flight Characteristics of Two Plume Moths, Alucita pentadacty/a L. and Orneodes hex- adactyla L. (Microlepidoptera), Zool. Scr.1, 241 (1972)

    1972

  60. [60]

    O’Callaghan, A

    F. O’Callaghan, A. Sarig, G. Ribak, and F.-O. Lehmann, Efficiency and Aerodynamic Performance of Bristled In- sect Wings Depending on Reynolds Number in Flapping Flight, Fluids7, 75 (2022)

    2022

  61. [61]

    Oehme, Untersuchungen ¨ uber Flug und Fl¨ ugelbau von Kleinv¨ ogeln, J

    H. Oehme, Untersuchungen ¨ uber Flug und Fl¨ ugelbau von Kleinv¨ ogeln, J. f¨ ur Ornithol.100, 363 (1959)

    1959

  62. [62]

    M. F. M. Osborne, Aerodynamics of Flapping Flight With Application to Insects, J. Exp. Biol.28, 221 (1951)

    1951

  63. [63]

    C. J. Pennycuick, Predicting Wingbeat Frequency and Wavelength of Birds, J. Exp. Biol.150, 171 (1990)

    1990

  64. [64]

    C. J. Pennycuick, Speeds and wingbeat frequencies of migrating birds compared with calculated benchmarks, J. Exp. Biol.204, 3283 (2001)

    2001

  65. [65]

    S. C. Reed, C. M. Williams, and L. E. Chadwick, Fre- quency of wing-beat as a character for separating species races and geographic varieties of drosophila, Genetics27, 349 (1942)

    1942

  66. [66]

    Sato and A

    M. Sato and A. Azuma, The Flight Performance of A Damselfly Ceriagrion Melanurum Selys, J. Exp. Biol. 200, 1765 (1997)

    1997

  67. [67]

    Sotavalta, Flight-Tone and Wing-Stroke Frequency of Insects and the Dynamics of Insect Flight, Nature170, 1057 (1952)

    O. Sotavalta, Flight-Tone and Wing-Stroke Frequency of Insects and the Dynamics of Insect Flight, Nature170, 1057 (1952)

    1952

  68. [68]

    Sotavalta, The effect of wing inertia on the wing-stroke frequency of moths, dragonflies and cockroach, Ann

    O. Sotavalta, The effect of wing inertia on the wing-stroke frequency of moths, dragonflies and cockroach, Ann. Bot. Fenn.20, 93 (1954)

    1954

  69. [69]

    Stolpe and K

    M. Stolpe and K. Zimmer, Der Schwirrflug des Kolibri im Zeitlupenfilm, J. f¨ ur Ornithol.87, 136 (1939)

    1939

  70. [70]

    Stresemann and K

    E. Stresemann and K. Zimmer, Ueber die Frequenz des Fluegelschlages beim Schwirrflug der Kolibris, Ornithol. Monatsberichte40, 129 (1932)

    1932

  71. [71]

    E. J. Williams, J. Murray-Bruce, and D. W. Murphy, An inverse problems approach to micro-PIV for measuring flow around freely flying tiny insects, J. Exp. Biol.228, jeb249417 (2025)

    2025

  72. [72]

    Yoshida, S

    A. Yoshida, S. Tejima, M. Sakuma, Y. Sakamaki, and R. Kodama, Coherent array of branched filamentary scales along the wing margin of a small moth, Sci. Nat. 104, 27 (2017)

    2017

  73. [73]

    Weis-Fogh, Quick Estimates of Flight Fitness in Hov- ering Animals, Including Novel Mechanisms for Lift Pro- duction, J

    T. Weis-Fogh, Quick Estimates of Flight Fitness in Hov- ering Animals, Including Novel Mechanisms for Lift Pro- duction, J. Exp. Biol.59, 169 (1973)

    1973

  74. [74]

    Cheng and M

    X. Cheng and M. Sun, Wing-kinematics measurement and aerodynamics in a small insect in hovering flight, Sci. Rep.6, 25706 (2016)

    2016

  75. [75]

    Y. Z. Lyu, H. J. Zhu, and M. Sun, Flapping-mode changes and aerodynamic mechanisms in miniature in- sects, Phys. Rev. E99, 012419 (2019)

    2019

  76. [76]

    Sun, Colloquium : Miniature insect flight, Rev

    M. Sun, Colloquium : Miniature insect flight, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 041001 (2023)

    2023

  77. [77]

    Dudley,The Biomechanics of Insect Flight: Form, Function, Evolution(Princeton University Press, 2000)

    R. Dudley,The Biomechanics of Insect Flight: Form, Function, Evolution(Princeton University Press, 2000)

    2000

  78. [78]

    Le Roy, N

    C. Le Roy, N. Tervelde, T. Engels, and F. T. Muijres, Adaptations in wing morphology rather than wingbeat kinematics enable flight in small hoverfly species, Elife 13, RP97839 (2025)

    2025

  79. [79]

    J. Gau, J. Lynch, B. Aiello, E. Wold, N. Gravish, and S. Sponberg, Bridging two insect flight modes in evo- lution, physiology and robophysics, Nature622, 767 (2023)

    2023

  80. [80]

    Model tested for best fit significance against the -2 scaling relation using Vuong’s closeness test:p <0.0001

Showing first 80 references.