Skip to main content
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses

New Research In

Physical Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Applied Mathematics
  • Applied Physical Sciences
  • Astronomy
  • Computer Sciences
  • Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences
  • Engineering
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Mathematics
  • Statistics

Social Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Economic Sciences
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Political Sciences
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Social Sciences

Biological Sciences

Featured Portals

  • Sustainability Science

Articles by Topic

  • Agricultural Sciences
  • Anthropology
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Biochemistry
  • Biophysics and Computational Biology
  • Cell Biology
  • Developmental Biology
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Sciences
  • Evolution
  • Genetics
  • Immunology and Inflammation
  • Medical Sciences
  • Microbiology
  • Neuroscience
  • Pharmacology
  • Physiology
  • Plant Biology
  • Population Biology
  • Psychological and Cognitive Sciences
  • Sustainability Science
  • Systems Biology
Research Article

Burrowing dynamics of aquatic worms in soft sediments

View ORCID ProfileArshad Kudrolli and Bernny Ramirez
PNAS December 17, 2019 116 (51) 25569-25574; first published November 27, 2019; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1911317116
Arshad Kudrolli
aDepartment of Physics, Clark University, Worcester, MA 01610
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Arshad Kudrolli
  • For correspondence: akudrolli@clarku.edu
Bernny Ramirez
aDepartment of Physics, Clark University, Worcester, MA 01610
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  1. Edited by David A. Weitz, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, and approved October 31, 2019 (received for review July 1, 2019)

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Significance

The physical principles of locomotion inside sediment beds at the bottom of water bodies are poorly understood because of the remoteness and opacity of the medium. We show that the common oligochaete Lumbriculus variegatus moves faster in sediments compared with water, while using a similar combination of elongation–contraction and transverse undulatory strokes, exploiting a higher drag anisotropy of its body. Tracking the worm inside transparent sediments, we show that its speed can be captured by a linear combination of calculated speeds with resistive-force theory and an anchor model of peristaltic motion. We then demonstrate that these locomotion strategies can be observed in composting worms and can be used to move effectively in media with a wide range of yield strengths.

Abstract

We investigate the dynamics of Lumbriculus variegatus in water-saturated sediment beds to understand limbless locomotion in the benthic zone found at the bottom of lakes and oceans. These slender aquatic worms are observed to perform elongation–contraction and transverse undulatory strokes in both water-saturated sediments and water. Greater drag anisotropy in the sediment medium is observed to boost the burrowing speed of the worm compared to swimming in water with the same stroke using drag-assisted propulsion. We capture the observed speeds by combining the calculated forms based on resistive-force theory of undulatory motion in viscous fluids and a dynamic anchor model of peristaltic motion in the sediments. Peristalsis is found to be effective for burrowing in noncohesive sediments which fill in rapidly behind the moving body inside the sediment bed. Whereas the undulatory stroke is found to be effective in water and in shallow sediment layers where anchoring is not possible to achieve peristaltic motion. We show that such dual strokes occur as well in the earthworm Eisenia fetida which inhabits moist sediments that are prone to flooding. Our analysis in terms of the rheology of the medium shows that the dual strokes are exploited by organisms to negotiate sediment beds that may be packed heterogeneously and can be used by active intruders to move effectively from a fluid through the loose bed surface layer which fluidizes easily to the well-consolidated bed below.

  • biolocomotion
  • burrowing
  • resistive-force theory
  • anchor model

Organisms burrowing in the benthic layer composed of organic and inorganic granular sediments at the bottom of water bodies can be found widely across our planet. While the strategies used by freely swimming waterborne organisms have been well studied, those used by limbless organisms which burrow in the loose sediment bed are far less known beyond the wide use of water jets to fluidize the sediments (1). For example, earthworms use peristalsis to move through terrestrial environments (2, 3), but their use in moving through noncohesive water-saturated sediments which fluidize easily is unclear because of the difficulty in visualizing the strokes in situ. It has been observed that undulatory body motion is employed to burrow through water-saturated sediments by sand lances (4) and opheliid polychaete Armandia brevis (5, 6), and it has been suggested that peristalsis may be insufficient to overcome fracture resistance or anchor small worms in unconsolidated sediments (5). Interestingly in this context, the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans is well documented to modify its undulatory gait from high to low frequencies from swimming in water to crawling on surfaces and through agarous (7). However, they appear to always undulate their bodies even while moving through loosely packed sediment monolayers (8) and fixed micropillar arrays (9).

While body undulations can be readily identified across a wide range of limbless organisms (10), the physical mechanism by which locomotion is accomplished varies significantly even in water, depending on the size and speed of the swimmer. It is long established that the drag of the body used by the swimmer to propel itself forward can be dominated by viscous forces at low speeds and by inertia at high speeds, as measured by the Reynolds number (11, 12). Measurements with spheres and rods moving in water-saturated soft sediments have found that the drag scaled by the buoyancy-subtracted weight of the grains can be used to define an effective friction μe which approaches a constant value μo at vanishing speeds and increases many-fold with speed (13⇓–15). While inertia and fluid viscosity can in general both play a role in determining the rate dependence, it has been found that inertial effects dominate in the case of millimeter-sized grains immersed in relatively low-viscosity fluids like water (13⇓–15). In this case, μe=μo+kIn, where k and n are material-dependent constants, and I is the inertial number. For rods (15), I=UdgDP/ρg, where U is the body speed, dg the grain diameter, D is the effective body diameter, P is the pressure, and ρg the grain density. Hence, the rheology encountered by a moving body in water-saturated sediment medium transitions from being shear rate-independent Coulomb friction-like at low speeds to rate-dependent fluid-like with increasing speed. This is different from Newtonian fluids like water, where the drag scales linearly with speed at low speeds and quadratically at higher speeds, independent of depth (16). Thus, it is important to understand the strategies used by active intruders in water-saturated sediments in terms of the actual rheological properties of the medium.

Here, we use the California blackworm Lumbriculus variegatus (Fig. 1A) as a paradigm to understand limbless burrowing in water-saturated soft sediments that can fluidize easily. This common freshwater oligochaete shows peristaltic motion while crawling on wet surfaces with waves of circular and longitudinal muscle contraction that move in the direction opposite to motion (17). However, their dynamics inside noncohesive water-saturated sediments have neither been observed directly nor analyzed in terms of the drag experienced in the medium. By using clear hydrogel grains, which appear transparent when immersed in water, we visualize the shape of the body while burrowing inside a sedimented bed (Fig. 1B and Methods) and compare it to that while swimming in water.

Fig. 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 1.

(A) An Image of L. variegatus. (B) The tracked head, tail, and centroid of a worm of length lw=36.6 mm inside the transparent sediments. The origin in the body reference frame corresponds to the centroid, and the x axis is oriented along the average angle θ that the worm subtends with the X axis in the laboratory reference frame. (C) A schematic of the container filled with water and a sediment bed. (D) A sample trajectory of a worm released at the surface of the sedimented granular bed with Hb=20.7 cm, Hc=22.2 cm, Lc=21.5 cm, and Wc=1.27 cm (Δt=1 s; T=1,000 s). Color bar shows progress of time. The dashed line indicates the surface of the bed which is otherwise invisible.

Results

Observations with L. variegatus.

The projected shapes of a L. variegatus released just above a sedimented bed in a water-filled container, shown schematically in Fig. 1C, is plotted at 1-s time intervals in Fig. 1D. The worm is observed to swim above the bed surface for a few seconds before burrowing rapidly down through the bed, turning, rising, and then further exploring the surface of the sedimented bed. Magnified views with higher time resolution of each phase can be found in SI Appendix, Fig. S1. It can be observed that the worm moves in a narrow sinusoidal path which is not much wider than its body width while burrowing in the sediments. Whereas greater lateral body motion is observed while it is swimming in water near the bed surface. Further, the worm can be also observed to reflect off the side walls and sometimes move backward. Similar behavior is observed as well in a sedimented bed inside thinner quasi-2D containers and wider cuboid containers (SI Appendix, Fig. S2). We also observe that the worms do not crawl up the side walls and slide on glass and acrylic surfaces when fully immersed in water. Thus, the container walls serve as a physical barrier and do not appear to aid the locomotion of the worm. Because the image analysis and tracking are far simpler in 2D, we discuss worm dynamics in a container with internal dimensions Lc=155 mm, Hc=164 mm, and Wc=2 mm, which is sufficiently wide to allow the worm to move freely. The effects of the constraints imposed by lateral walls on the dynamics are further discussed in SI Appendix, Effect of Container Thickness. We focus on the locomotion dynamics when the worm is away from the side walls and when it is essentially traveling forward without turning on itself.

The projected shapes of a worm of length lw=26.6 mm and dw=0.5 mm moving in the sediments are shown in Fig. 2A as it travels approximately its body length. We observe that it traces a narrow path in the medium, similar in form to that observed in the sedimented bed in the Wc=12.7-mm-wide container shown in Fig. 1C. To compare and contrast the observed burrowing dynamics with swimming, we show the worm shapes recorded when constrained between 2 parallel plates separated by 2 mm and immersed in a container filled with water in Fig. 2B. (A schematic can be found in SI Appendix, Fig. S4A.) Because the worm does not swim up very high above the surface unless threatened, we measure the motion when the quasi-2D container is horizontal so that the strokes and the trajectories can be compared while being constrained similarly. Over the same time window, we observe that the worm moves forward only a fraction of its body length while performing somewhat larger undulatory strokes in water. If sediments are also added in this horizontal orientation of the observation plane, corresponding to near-zero overburden pressure as near the surface (SI Appendix, Effect of Sediment Consolidation on Anchoring), we observe the path is narrower compared to that in water, but not as narrow as in the vertical orientation shown in Fig. 2, where the weight of the grains above pushes on the worm to constrain it to move in a still tighter path (SI Appendix, Fig. S4B).

Fig. 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 2.

(A and B) Worm trajectory in the laboratory frame of reference in the sediments (A) and water (B). The worm of length lw=26.6 mm is observed to follow a narrow sinusoidal path in the sediments compared to undulating in place in water. (C and D) The corresponding worm shapes in the body frame of reference are also shown shifted up by a fixed distance over each time interval for clarity (Δt=200 ms and T=20 s). (E and F) Measured cumulative displacement parallel D‖ and perpendicular D⊥ to the worm orientation in sediments (E) and water (F) over T=40 s.

To compare the form of the strokes used while burrowing and swimming, we use the body reference frame which is oriented along the average direction in which the worm points and where its origin is located at the worm centroid as shown in Fig. 1B. We plot the same measured shapes in Fig. 2 C and D in the body reference frame, but where the centroid is shifted vertically by time denoted by the vertical axis. We observe that transverse undulations and that the worm elongations and length contraction can be observed in fact in both media. To show that the shortening of the worm indeed arises due its changes, and not simply because of the transverse undulations, we obtain the difference of dynamic worm length from its mean length Δlw(t) and use the color bar to render each snapshot. Periodic changes in the length can be unambiguously observed.

Then, we obtain the component of worm speed over a short time interval Δt parallel to the average body axis v‖=ΔRc⋅x^/Δt and the speed perpendicular to the average body axis v⊥=ΔRc⋅ŷ/Δt. The resulting cumulative displacements of the worm in the direction parallel to the average body axis D‖(t)=∑0tv‖Δt and perpendicular to the average body axis D⊥(t)=∑0tv⊥Δt are plotted in Fig. 2 E and F over a longer observation time T=40 s, with Δt=200 ms. We observe that the worm moves on average along the direction of the body orientation in both media. Hence, the average forward speed of the worm vw≈D‖/T. Fig. 3A shows the worm locomotion speed vw measured over a time interval T≥20 s as a function of lw using 9 different worms in the sediments and 7 different worms in water listed in SI Appendix, Table S1. Besides higher speeds in the sediments, an overall increasing trend with lw is found with significant variations from worm to worm due to behavioral differences. In the following, we focus on understanding the measured speed in terms of the strokes used by the worm and the rheology of the medium.

Fig. 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 3.

(A) The measured worm speed versus its length shows significant scatter from worm to worm. However, vw is overall higher in the sediments compared with water. (B) The transverse amplitude AT increases approximately linearly with lw. (C) KT(t) shows a peak at TT (indicated by arrow) corresponding to the transverse undulations timescale. (D) Sw versus Re is observed to scale roughly linearly. (E and F) Calculated Uund versus vw using resistive force theory assuming low amplitude and low-Re conditions in water (E) and the sediments (F). The line slope is 0.94 with goodness of fit R2=0.93 in water and a slope 0.52 and R2=0.49 in the sediments (main text). Peristaltic motion, besides undulation, contributes to vw leading to the lower correlation in the sediments.

Transverse Body Undulations.

We measure the transverse undulations using the root-mean-square (rms) transverse amplitude in the body frame of reference AT=⟨y2⟩, where ⟨..⟩ denotes averaging over the length of the worm. Fig. 3B shows a plot of AT where we observe that it increases roughly linearly with lw and with slightly higher slope in water compared with the sediments (AT/lw=0.069 and goodness of linear regression R2=0.94 versus AT/lw=0.052 and R2=0.67). Further, by characterizing the worm orientation correlation function as discussed in SI Appendix, Worm-Body Orientation Correlations, we find its persistence length to be of the order of its length in both media. Thus, the worm can be considered as rod-like with undulation amplitude AT/lw≪1 in both media.

Then, to determine the relevant regime for its dynamics, we use the Reynolds number Re=ρvwlw/μ, where ρ and μ are the density and viscosity of the medium, respectively, and the swimming number Sw=ρvTlw/μ, where vT is the velocity associated with the transverse oscillations which determines propulsion (18). For 2D sinusoidal oscillations with amplitude B and frequency fT, vT=2πfTB, and we have with B=2AT, Sw=22πfTATlw/μ. To estimate fT, we use the displacement yc(t) corresponding to the midsection of the worm in the body frame of reference and calculate the transverse amplitude correlation function KT(t)=⟨yc(to+t)yc(to)⟩/⟨yc2⟩ averaged over time to. From Fig. 3C, we observe that KT(t) oscillates and shows peaks which correspond to the period of transverse oscillations. We use the time at which the first strong peak occurs with the timescale TT and determine fT=1/TT. Then, we find from the plot of Sw and Re in Fig. 3D that the estimated Re ranges between 1 and 20 in the case of water, corresponding to the crossover regime where viscous and inertia effects can be important. Nonetheless, we find that Sw increases linearly with Re consistent with what may be expected by resistive force theory in the low-Re and low-amplitude regime (11), where the swimming speed of an undulating filamentUund=2π2fTB2λ(ξr−1),[1]where ξr is the ratio of the drag in the perpendicular and parallel directions w.r.t. the rod axis. We plot this estimated swimming speed versus the measured speed in Fig. 3E using λ≈lw and ξr=2 for water (19) and find excellent agreement. Then, multiplying Eq. 1 by ρlw/μ on both sides, we haveSw=lw2πAT(ξr−1)Re,[2]which corresponds to the line drawn in Fig. 3D using AT/lw=0.069 and ξr=2.

Drag-Assisted Propulsion in Sediments.

To find the appropriate drag encountered by the worm while undulating in the sediments, we performed complementary measurements with a thin rod corresponding to the worm body over the typical range of speeds encountered by the worm. As discussed in more detail in SI Appendix, Drag Measurements, we observe a drag which increases sublinearly with speed and depends on the orientation of the rod axis relative to the direction of motion. Over the range of speeds U from 0.1 to 10 mm⋅s−1 relevant to the motion of the worm, we measure the effective viscosity of the medium ηe≈4.0×U−0.63 Pa⋅s and ξr≈6 as shown in SI Appendix, Fig. S6. This measured ξr is similar in magnitude, but somewhat lower than the drag anisotropy of ∼10 reported in dry granular matter (20).

The estimated Re and Sw corresponding to the worm motion in the sediments are also shown in Fig. 3D. They are systematically lower than that for water because the effective viscosity in the medium is essentially 1,000 times higher than that of water, while the worm parameters remain essentially unchanged. We also observe that Sw versus Re can be described by a linear fit. Now, it has been shown that resistive force theory may be applied to sandfish lizards moving through dry sand (20). Thus, notwithstanding the shear thinning nature of the medium, we may expect Eq. 1 to capture the undulatory component of the worm speed. We plot the estimated Uund versus vw with ξr=6 for sediments in Fig. 3D and observe that the data can be described by a linear fit, but with a slope of 0.52 and R2=0.49 indicating the presence of other factors which contribute to the observed vw. Now, if shear thinning effects of the medium were important, it would lead to a lower estimate of Uund (21) which is opposite to the trend needed to capture the lower slope. Thus, to understand the difference, we examine next the contribution of the observed peristaltic motion to the locomotion speed of the worm.

Peristaltic Motion.

To extract the dominant oscillation frequency, we obtain the longitudinal amplitude correlation function KL(t)=⟨Δlw(to+t)Δlw(to)⟩/⟨Δlw2⟩, where ⟨..⟩ denotes averaging over time to, and ⟨Δlw2⟩ is the mean-square fluctuation over T. Fig. 4 A and B show plots of KL(t) in the case of the sediments and water, respectively. Peaks corresponding to the dominant periods can be observed in both media. We associate the longitudinal oscillation period TL with the first peak, which is observed to be stronger and clearer in the sediment example.

Fig. 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 4.

(A and B) The length correlation function KL(t) in sediments (A) and in water (B). (C and D) The velocity correlation Kv(t) in sediments (C) and in water (D). The peaks are correlated corresponding to peristaltic motion in the sediments. (E) The measured worm speed vw versus the calculated peristaltic speed vper using the anchor model. The dashed line corresponds to a linear fit with slope 0.5±0.1. (Insets) Illustration of the anchor model (Upper Left) and the fractional change in worm diameter at its center over time (Lower Right).

Then, we calculate the velocity correlation function Kv(t)=⟨vw(to+t)vw(to)⟩/vw2, which measures the correlation of vw at time to with that after a short time t. Because of the normalization by vw2, Kv(t) can be expected to oscillate or approach 1 over time. Kv(t) is plotted in Fig. 4 C and D in the sediments and water, respectively, and shows oscillations about the average value in both media. In the sediments, Kv(t) always remains positive while oscillating and remains strong over the duration plotted. Whereas Kv(t) becomes negative in water, indicating a back and forth motion at short timescales, before decaying rapidly to the mean value. Further, comparing the peaks in KL(t) with those in Kv(t) in the sediments, we observe that the dominant oscillation period TL in KL(t) is twice the period Tv in Kv(t). In comparison, the first peak in KL(t) and Kv(t) appear at the same time in water.

Anchor Model.

To understand these correlations, we consider an idealized anchor model of peristaltic motion (3) as illustrated in Fig. 4E, Upper Left Inset. Here, the worm is represented in the form of a pair of beads connected by a spring which travels forward by elongating its body through a length ϵ while anchoring its tail and then moving forward by contracting its body through the same length ϵ while anchoring its head to regain its initial length, as indicated by the arrows. Then, the distance moved by the worm centroid is ϵ/2 during the expansion as well as the contraction phase, and the net displacement is ϵ in each period of oscillation. On the other hand, if the worm is not anchored, but slips similarly during the expansion and contraction phase, then the net displacement can be expected to be less than ϵ by a factor α, which is between 0 and 1.

Assuming that the primary oscillation of the worm length occurs sinusoidally with period of longitudinal oscillation TL, we have Δlw(t)=AL⁡sin(2πt/Tl)+Δls(t), where Δls(t) captures additional time dependence with ⟨Δls(t)⟩=0. Then, ⟨Δlw(to)Δlw(to+t)⟩=12AL2⁡cos(2πt/Tl)+⟨Δls2⟩. If Δls(t) decays rapidly compared with Tl, then the peaks associated with the sinusoidal mode in Kl(t) can be expected have constant amplitude AL2/2 after the initial rapid decay as is seen in Fig. 4A. Because ϵ=2AL and Tv=TL/2, we can then estimate the speed due to peristaltic motion to be U(t)=Uper(1+cos4πt/TL) to leading order, withUper=2αAL/TL.[3]Obtaining AL from the strength of the first peak in KL(t), we plot the calculated speed Uper versus the measured speed vw in Fig. 4E. We find that Uper versus vw can be fitted by a straight line with a slope Uper/vw=0.5±0.1. In arriving at these values, we have ignored other oscillation frequencies which may contribute to the peristaltic motion. An upper bound Uper/vw=0.85 can be estimated using KL(t) corresponding to t=0 s which includes all length fluctuations. Some of these contributions may offset the fact that the worm does not travel in a straight line, but rather in a sinusoidal path. Hence, we conclude that the peristaltic motion contributes at least equally to the locomotion speed of these worms in the sediments.

Medium Rheology and Locomotion Speed.

L. variegatus is known to dynamically deploy 10- to 20-μm-long hair-like projections called chaetae (22) along with muscle contractions to change the relative friction during the sliding and anchoring phase while crawling on solid surfaces (17). Given the small size of chaetae relative to dw, deploying them has negligible effect on the drag experienced by a worm in a fluid which obeys nonslip boundary conditions. Thus, the anchoring parameter α can be expected to be approximately zero in water and other Newtonian fluids. By contrast, the drag experienced by an intruder in sediments can depend sensitively on the normal force acting between the grains in the medium and its surface (13, 14). Even if the friction between the worm and the grains can be changed, anchoring cannot be achieved if the grains are very loosely packed as when the overburden pressure is nearly zero or when grains simply move out of the way as near the bed surface as discussed in SI Appendix, Effect of Sediment Consolidation on Anchoring.

Thus, the yield-stress nature of the medium is also important to achieving anchoring needed for peristaltic motion. This strength characterized by μo in turn depends on the volume fraction of the sediments ϕ. If ϕ is below a critical value ϕc, the medium can flow and μo can be expected to vanish. When ϕ→ϕc≈0.6, corresponding to the volume fraction of the sedimented bed (13), the granular medium jams and the yield strength increases rapidly within a few percent of this value. Because we observe peristaltic motion, we conclude that the worm can dynamically anchor itself by manipulating ϕ near its body by changing its diameter as shown in Fig. 4E, Lower Right Inset, in addition to deploying chaetae to vary the friction between its body and the medium.

Then, assuming that the locomotion speed of the worm occurs due to a linear superposition of the contributions due to the undulatory and the peristaltic motion, we have Ucal=Uund+Uper. Fig. 5 shows a plot of Ucal versus vw in the sediments and in water corresponding the trails listed in SI Appendix, Table S1. In the case of water and shallow sediment beds, as discussed, α=0 due to absence of anchoring, and only the contribution of the undulatory stroke is included. We observe that all of the data are clustered around the slope 1 line, showing good agreement between the calculated and measured speeds in both media. Thus, we find that the burrowing speed of L. variegatus in water-saturated sediments is determined by a combination of drag-assisted propulsion provided by the transverse undulatory motion and peristaltic motion along its body. Whereas only the transverse undulatory motion is important to its swimming speed in water and near the bed surface where the overburden pressure goes to zero.

Fig. 5.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 5.

The calculated versus the measured speeds corresponding to the trails listed in SI Appendix, Table S1 are in good agreement. A dashed line with slope 1 is drawn for reference.

Dual Strokes in Eisenia fetida.

We further investigate the dynamics of the common composting earthworm Eisenia fetida to examine whether dual peristaltic and undulatory strokes are observed in other organisms as well. The general behavior of the earthworms and their physical characteristics are discussed in SI Appendix, Earthworm Dynamics. Fig. 6A shows the projected shapes of the earthworm as it burrows straight down in a container with Lc=50 cm, Hc=30 cm, and Wc=28 mm filled with the same sediment medium over T=10 s. As in the case of L. variegatus shown in Fig. 2A, we observe that the earthworm burrows in a narrow sinusoidal path which is not much wider than its body except near its head and tail. Then, by plotting the same snapshots as for L. variegatus in the body reference frame in Fig. 2B, we observe that E. fetida also performs undulatory strokes as well as elongation–contraction strokes.

Fig. 6.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig. 6.

(A and B) Tracked snapshots of the composting earthworm E. fetida of length lw=68.6 mm over T=10 s at Δt=109 ms time intervals in the laboratory reference frame (A) and body reference frame (B) as it burrows through water-saturated granular sediments. The progress of time is denoted by colors according to the color bar in A, and the length relative to the mean length is denoted according to the color bar in B. E. fetida shows peristaltic motion and transverse undulations similar to those observed in L. variegatus in Fig. 2A. The peaks in the length correlation function (C) occur at approximately twice the time interval compared to those in the velocity correlations (D).

To access the period of the longitudinal stroke, we plot KL(t) in Fig. 6C and observe a clear peak at TL=1.6 s. By comparison, a peak in Kv(t) is observed at approximately half of TL corresponding to the signature of peristaltic motion which was also seen in L. variegatus as in Fig. 4 C and E. Accordingly, we calculate Uper=4.5 mm⋅s−1 using Eq. 1 over a time interval where its average speed is measured to be 7.3 mm⋅s−1 or ∼61%, assuming α=1. Then, we obtain B from the transverse undulations to estimate Uund. We estimate TT=15.4±1 s from the peak in KT shown in SI Appendix, Fig. S7C. Then, we obtain Uund=2.4 mm⋅s−1 or ∼33% of the measured speed. Thus, a combination of peristaltic and undulatory strokes contributes to the observed burrowing speed of E. fetida in water-saturated sediments as well. These data, along with 2 other datasets, have been also added to Fig. 5 and are observed to be in overall agreement with the calculated values.

Discussion and Concluding Remarks

Thus, by directly tracking L. variegatus and E. fetida inside water and sediments, we have demonstrated that limbless worms can move in media with wide-ranging rheological properties using a combination of peristaltic and undulatory strokes. While the stroke amplitude can be modified somewhat as evidenced by the decrease of transverse undulations in sediments compared to in water, the nature of the medium has a significant impact on the effectiveness of these strokes. When the worm cannot anchor itself, as when moving in water or near the surface of a sedimented bed, our study shows that only the transverse undulatory motion is important to achieving locomotion. But deep in the sediment bed, where the overburden pressure causes the grains to stay in close contact, we observe clear importance of peristaltic motion in achieving locomotion. Conversely, lacking the dual strokes, a worm would be at a disadvantage while swimming in the water or in the unconsolidated grains very near the bed surface. Whereas an undulating worm would be increasingly at a disadvantage as it burrows deeper because the drag in moving perpendicular to its body grows more rapidly than parallel to its body, making that motion prohibitive at large enough depth. In fact, peristaltic motion can be expected to dominate as an active intruder moves deeper based on our analysis. This suggests that active intruders, whether biological or synthetic, can be designed to exploit these dual strokes to move between fluid-like regions with negligible yield stress and frictional granular regions with large yield stress.

Methods

Specimens.

L. variegatus were obtained from Carolina Biological Supply Company (https://www.carolina.com) on October 3, 2017 and were sustained in a freshwater aquarium. E. fetida were obtained from Uncle Jim’s Worm Farm (https://unclejimswormfarm.com/) on June 6, 2017 and were maintained in a wet soil-filled container. The worms used to perform quantitative measurements are listed in SI Appendix, Table S1. Both were housed in an air-conditioned laboratory maintained at 24±2 °C.

Medium.

We use clear hydrogel grains (Acrylic Acid Polymer Sodium Salt; Sumitomo Seika Chemicals Co.) with density ρg=1.004 g⋅cm−3 and diameter dg ranging from 0.5 mm to 2 mm that are fully immersed in water as the sediment medium. Its volume fraction in the sedimented bed is measured to be ϕg=0.6±0.01.

Worm Tracking.

Because the refractive indexes of these grains and water are essentially the same, the medium appears transparent, allowing us to visualize the worm dynamics through transparent glass sidewalls. Images are thresholded to identify a connected set of pixels associated with the worm body. Its head, tail, and skeletal shape are then found using the operation bwmorph in the Image Processing Toobox in MATLAB.

SI Datasets.

The data corresponding to the measured worm speed, worm length, specimens, and containers used can be found in SI Appendix and in Datasets S1–S5.

Acknowledgments

We thank Andreea Panaitescu, Gregory Jones, Rausan Jewel, and Benjamin Allen for assistance with experiments and Alex Petroff for comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant CBET-1805398.

Footnotes

  • ↵1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: akudrolli{at}clarku.edu.
  • Author contributions: A.K. and B.R. designed research, performed research, analyzed data, and wrote the paper.

  • The authors declare no competing interest.

  • This article is a PNAS Direct Submission.

  • This article contains supporting information online at https://www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10.1073/pnas.1911317116/-/DCSupplemental.

Published under the PNAS license.

View Abstract

References

  1. ↵
    1. A. E. Hosoi,
    2. D. I. Goldman
    , Beneath our feet: Strategies for locomotion in granular media. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 47, 431–453 (2015).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. ↵
    1. K. J. Quillin
    , Kinematic scaling of locomotion by hydrostatic animals: Ontogeny of peristaltic crawling by the earthworm Lumbricus terrestris. J. Exp. Biol. 202, 661–674 (1999).
    OpenUrlAbstract
  3. ↵
    1. Y. Tanaka,
    2. K. Ito,
    3. T. Nakagaki,
    4. R. Kobayashi
    , Mechanics of peristaltic locomotion and role of anchoring. Proc. R. Soc. Interface 9, 222–233 (2012).
    OpenUrl
  4. ↵
    1. N. J. Gidmark,
    2. J. A. Strother,
    3. J. M. Horton,
    4. A. P. Summers,
    5. E. L. Brainerd
    , Locomotory transition from water to sand and its effects on undulatory kinematics in sand lances (ammodytidae). J. Exp. Biol. 214, 657–664 (2011).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. ↵
    1. K. M. Dorgan,
    2. C. J. Law,
    3. G. W. Rouse
    , Meandering worms: Mechanics of undulatory burrowing in muds. Proc. R. Soc. B 280, 20122948 (2013).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. K. M. Dorgan
    , The biomechanics of burrowing and boring. J. Exp. Biol. 218, 176–183 (2015).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. ↵
    1. C. Fang-Yen et al.
    , Biomechanical analysis of gait adaptation in the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107, 20323–20328 (2010).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. S. Jung
    , Caenorhabditis elegans swimming in a saturated particulate system. Phys. Fluids 22, 031903 (2010).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. ↵
    1. S. R. Lockery et al.
    , Artificial dirt: Microfluidic substrates for nematode neurobiology and behavior. J. Neurophysiol. 99, 3136–3143 (2008).
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. J. Gray
    , Undulatory propulsion. J. Cell Sci. s3-94, 551–578 (1953).
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. J. Lighthill
    , Flagellar hydrodynamics. SIAM Rev. 18, 161–230 (1976).
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. E. Lauga,
    2. T. R. Powers
    , The hydrodynamics of swimming microorganisms. Rep. Prog. Phys. 72, 096601 (2009).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  13. ↵
    1. A. Panaitescu,
    2. X. Clotet,
    3. A. Kudrolli
    , Drag law for an intruder in granular sediments. Phys. Rev. E 95, 032901 (2017).
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. R. Jewel,
    2. A. Panaitescu,
    3. A. Kudrolli
    , Micromechanics of intruder motion in wet granular medium. Phys. Rev. Fluids 3, 084303 (2018).
    OpenUrl
  15. ↵
    1. B. Allen,
    2. A. Kudrolli
    , Effective drag of a rod in fluid-saturated granular beds. Phys. Rev. E 100, 022901 (2019).
    OpenUrl
  16. ↵
    1. N. J. Balmforth,
    2. I. A. Frigaard,
    3. G. Ovarlez
    , Yielding to stress: Recent developments in viscoplastic fluid mechanics. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 46, 121–146 (2014).
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. C. Drewes,
    2. K. Cain
    , As the worm turns: Locomotion in a freshwater oligochaete worm. Am. Biol. Teach. 46, 438–442 (1999).
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. M. Gazzola,
    2. M. Argentina,
    3. L. Mahadevan
    , Scaling macroscopic aquatic locomotion. Nat. Phys. 10, 758–761 (2014).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  19. ↵
    1. R. G. Cox
    , The motion of long slender bodies in a viscous fluid part 1. General theory. J. Fluid Mech. 44, 791–810 (1970).
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  20. ↵
    1. R. D. Maladen,
    2. Y. Ding,
    3. C. Li,
    4. D. I. Goldman
    , Undulatory swimming in sand: Subsurface locomotion of the sandfish lizard. Science 325, 314–318 (2009).
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  21. ↵
    1. E. E. Riley,
    2. E. Lauga
    , Empirical resistive-force theory for slender biological filaments in shear-thinning fluids. Phys. Rev. E 95, 062416 (2017).
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. M. R. Marchese,
    2. M. R. dos Santos,
    3. J. C. dos Santos Lima,
    4. P. A. Z. Pamplin
    , First record of introduced species Lumbriculus variegatus müller, 1774 (lumbriculidae, clitellata) in Brazil. BioInvasions Rec. 4, 81–85 (2015).
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Burrowing dynamics of aquatic worms in soft sediments
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Burrowing dynamics of aquatic worms in soft sediments
Arshad Kudrolli, Bernny Ramirez
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dec 2019, 116 (51) 25569-25574; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1911317116

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Burrowing dynamics of aquatic worms in soft sediments
Arshad Kudrolli, Bernny Ramirez
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dec 2019, 116 (51) 25569-25574; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1911317116
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 116 (51)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Article Classifications

  • Biological Sciences
  • Applied Biological Sciences
  • Physical Sciences
  • Physics

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Results
    • Discussion and Concluding Remarks
    • Methods
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Abstract depiction of a guitar and musical note
Science & Culture: At the nexus of music and medicine, some see disease treatments
Although the evidence is still limited, a growing body of research suggests music may have beneficial effects for diseases such as Parkinson’s.
Image credit: Shutterstock/agsandrew.
Scientist looking at an electronic tablet
Opinion: Standardizing gene product nomenclature—a call to action
Biomedical communities and journals need to standardize nomenclature of gene products to enhance accuracy in scientific and public communication.
Image credit: Shutterstock/greenbutterfly.
One red and one yellow modeled protein structures
Journal Club: Study reveals evolutionary origins of fold-switching protein
Shapeshifting designs could have wide-ranging pharmaceutical and biomedical applications in coming years.
Image credit: Acacia Dishman/Medical College of Wisconsin.
White and blue bird
Hazards of ozone pollution to birds
Amanda Rodewald, Ivan Rudik, and Catherine Kling talk about the hazards of ozone pollution to birds.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Goats standing in a pin
Transplantation of sperm-producing stem cells
CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing can improve the effectiveness of spermatogonial stem cell transplantation in mice and livestock, a study finds.
Image credit: Jon M. Oatley.

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Articles
  • Archive

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490