I just sent this:
Dear professors Hatala, Gatesy and Falkingham,
I just read with interest your article
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
"Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet",
beginning with
"The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking and running."
IOO, this is confusing cause and consequence:
- runners (bipedal or quadrupedal) are unguli- or digitigrade, incl. e.g. kangaroos,
- walkers (bipedal or quadrupedal) are often plantigrade, incl. e.g. humans, sealions.
IOO, a more correct sentence had been:
"The longitudinal arch of the human foot, used today for bipedal walking and running, is a consequence of our waterside past",
google e.g. "GondwanaTalks Verhaegen English".
With best wishes --marc verhaegen
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)