A Classic Graphic Reveals Nature’s Most Efficient Traveler

A famous graphic, now updated, compares locomotion in the animal kingdom

By Allison Parshall & DTAN Studio edited by Jen Christiansen & Clara Moskowitz

Detail of a chart shows data points labelled human on a bicycle, human on a velomobile, human, horse, automobile, pigeon, dog, salmon and others. — DTAN Studio

We’re celebrating 180 years of Scientific American. Explore our legacy of discovery and look ahead to the future.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Humans aren’t very efficient movers—until you put us on a bicycle, when we become some of the most energy-efficient land travelers in the animal kingdom. For Scientific American’s 180th birthday, we’ve updated a classic graphic comparing different forms of animal locomotion, first published in this magazine in 1973.

Travel involves two main expenditures of energy: fighting gravity and propelling yourself forward. Most terrestrial animals must expend energy first to stand up, then to take each step forward. (Longer-legged land creatures tend to be more efficient because they get more distance out of each step, which explains why mice are so inefficient.) Flying animals, though, can move forward cheaply by gliding through the air, carried more by currents than by their own power. Swimming animals can similarly glide through water while letting their natural buoyancy minimize the need to fight gravity.

Bikes allow us terrestrial folk to be more like fish. Wheels and bearings roll with low friction, letting us coast without putting in power by pedaling, and the rigid frame supports the sitting rider against gravity.* “They turn humans into this hyperefficient terrestrial locomotor because they make being on land more like swimming,” says Tyson Hedrick, a comparative physiologist at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. The main drawback is our clunky human shape; bicyclists aren’t streamlined like bluefin tuna, so they must overcome more drag. Hedrick calculates that bicycles with an aerodynamic shell, called velomobiles, can let humans move with even more aquatic efficiency.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Chart shows cost of transport values plotted against body weight for four categories: swimmers, fliers, walkers/runners and vehicles. Human on a bicycle is more efficient than a human alone and is in-line with the trend formed by swimmers. — DTAN Studio; Sources: “Energetic Cost of Locomotion in Animals,” by Vance A. Tucker, in *Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology*, Vol. 34; June 15, 1970 (*most data*); chart by Dan Todd in “Bicycle Technology,” by S. S. Wilson, in *Scientific American*, Vol. 228, No. 3; March 1973 (*data for human on a bicycle*); Tyson Hedrick/University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (*velomobile calculation*)

*Editor’s Note (2/5/26): This sentence was edited after posting to better clarify how bicycles let us coast.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American