↓ Skip to main content

Elastic energy storage in the shoulder and the evolution of high-speed throwing in Homo

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
98 news outlets
blogs
18 blogs
twitter
151 X users
facebook
22 Facebook pages
googleplus
7 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
228 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
466 Mendeley
Title
Elastic energy storage in the shoulder and the evolution of high-speed throwing in Homo
Published in
Nature, June 2013
DOI 10.1038/nature12267
Pubmed ID
Authors

Neil T. Roach, Madhusudhan Venkadesan, Michael J. Rainbow, Daniel E. Lieberman

Abstract

Some primates, including chimpanzees, throw objects occasionally, but only humans regularly throw projectiles with high speed and accuracy. Darwin noted that the unique throwing abilities of humans, which were made possible when bipedalism emancipated the arms, enabled foragers to hunt effectively using projectiles. However, there has been little consideration of the evolution of throwing in the years since Darwin made his observations, in part because of a lack of evidence of when, how and why hominins evolved the ability to generate high-speed throws. Here we use experimental studies of humans throwing projectiles to show that our throwing capabilities largely result from several derived anatomical features that enable elastic energy storage and release at the shoulder. These features first appear together approximately 2 million years ago in the species Homo erectus. Taking into consideration archaeological evidence suggesting that hunting activity intensified around this time, we conclude that selection for throwing as a means to hunt probably had an important role in the evolution of the genus Homo.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 151 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 466 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
India 3 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Japan 2 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 444 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 79 17%
Student > Bachelor 61 13%
Student > Master 60 13%
Researcher 55 12%
Professor 35 8%
Other 113 24%
Unknown 63 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 93 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 55 12%
Sports and Recreations 50 11%
Engineering 35 8%
Arts and Humanities 29 6%
Other 124 27%
Unknown 80 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1028. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 January 2024.
All research outputs
#15,693
of 25,712,965 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#1,585
of 98,575 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55
of 209,631 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#7
of 1,019 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,712,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,575 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 209,631 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,019 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.