European Journal of Applied Physiology

, Volume 109, Issue 4, pp 607–616 | Cite as

A comparison of the physiological consequences of head-loading and back-loading for African and European women

  • R. Lloyd
  • B. Parr
  • S. Davies
  • T. Partridge
  • C. Cooke
Original Article


The aim is to quantify the physiological cost of head-load carriage and to examine the ‘free ride’ hypothesis for head-load carriage in groups of women differing in their experience of head-loading. Twenty-four Xhosa women [13 experienced head-loaders (EXP), 11 with no experience of head-loading (NON)] attempted to carry loads of up to 70% of body mass on both their heads and backs whilst walking on a treadmill at a self-selected walking speed. Expired air was collected throughout. In a second study nine women, members of the British Territorial Army, carried similar loads, again at a self-selected speed. Maximum load carried was greater for the back than the head (54.7 ± 15.1 vs. 40.8 ± 13.2% BM, P < 0.0005). Considering study one, head-loading required a greater oxygen rate than back-loading (10.1 ± 2.6 vs. 8.8 ± 2.3 ml kg bodymass−1 min−1, P = 0.043, for loads 10–25% BM) regardless of previous head-loading experience (P = 0.333). Percentage changes in oxygen consumption associated with head-loading were greater than the proportional load added in both studies but were smaller than the added load for the lighter loads carried on the back in study 1. All other physiological variables were consistent with changes in oxygen consumption. The data provides no support for the ‘free ride’ hypothesis for head-loading although there is some evidence of energy saving mechanisms for back-loading at low speed/load combinations. Investigating the large individual variation in response may help in identifying combinations of factors that contribute to improved economy.


Physiology Load carriage economy Oxygen consumption ‘Free ride’ hypothesis African women Head-loading Back-loading Walking 



This work was funded by: The Carnegie Trust for Higher Education in Scotland; The School of Social and Health Sciences, University of Abertay Dundee; The Department of Sport Management, Cape Peninsula University of Technology.


  1. Abe D, Yanagawa K, Niihata S (2004) Effect of load carriage, load position, and walking speed on energy cost of walking. Appl Ergon 35:329–335CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Abe D, Muraki S, Yasukouchi A (2008) Ergonomic effects of load carriage on energy cost of gradient walking. Appl Ergon 35:329–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Al-Khabbaz YS, Shimada T, Hasegawa M (2008) The effect of backpack heaviness on trunk–lower extremity muscle activities and trunk posture. Gait Posture 28(2):297–302CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastien GJ, Willems PA, Schepens B, Heglund NC (2005a) Effect of load and speed on the energetic cost of human walking. Eur J Appl Physiol 94:76–83CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bastien GJ, Schepens P, Willems PA, Heglund NC (2005b) Energetics of load carrying in Nepalese porters. Science 308:1755CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Birrell SA, Hooper RH (2007) Initial subjective load carriage injury data collected with interviews and questionnaires. Mil Med 172(3):306–311PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Birrell SA, Hooper RH, Haslam RA (2007) The effect of military load carriage on ground reaction forces. Gait Posture 26:611–614CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bobet J, Norman RW (1984) Effects of load placement on back muscle activity in load carriage. Eur J Appl Physiol 53(1):71–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cavagna GA, Willems PA, Legramandi MA, Heglund NC (2002) Pendular energy transduction within the step in human walking. J Exp Biol 205:3413–3422PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Charteris J, Nottrodt JW, Scott PA (1989a) The ‘free ride’ hypothesis: a second look at the efficiency of African women headload carriers. S Afr J Sci 85:68–71Google Scholar
  11. Charteris J, Scott PA, Nottrodt JW (1989b) Metabolic and kinematic responses of African women headload carriers under controlled conditions of load and speed. Ergonomics 32:1539–1550CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Chow HK, Kwok M, Au-Yanf A, Holmes A, Cheng J, Yao F, Wong MS (2005) The effect of backpack load on the gait of normal adolescent girls. Ergonomics 6:642–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Datta SR, Ramanathan NL (1971) Ergonomic comparison of seven modes of carrying loads on the horizontal plane. Ergonomics 14(2):269–278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Datta SR, Chatterjee BB, Roy BN (1973) The relationship between energy expenditure and pulse rates with body weight and the load carried during load carrying on the level. Ergonomics 16(4):507–513CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Heglund NC, Willems PA, Penta M, Cavagna GA (1995) Energy saving gait mechanics with head-supported loads. Nature 375:52–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Holewijn M (1990) Physiological strain due to load carrying. Eur J Appl Physiol 61(3–4):237–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Jones CDR, Jarjou MS, Whitbread RG, Jequier E (1987) Fatness and the energy cost of carrying loads in African women. Lancet 12:1331–1332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kirk J, Schneider DA (1992) Physiological and perceptual responses to load-carrying in female subjects using internal and external frame backpacks. Ergonomics 35(4):445–455CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. LaFiandra M, Wagenaar RC, Holt KG, Obusek JP (2003) How do load carriage and walking speed influence trunk coordination and stride parameters? J Biomech 36:87–95CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Legg SJ, Mahanty A (1985) Comparison of five modes of carrying a load close to the trunk. Ergonomics 28:1653–1660CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Li JX, Hong Y, Robinson PD (2003) The effect of load carriage on movement kinematics and respiratory parameters in children during walking. Eur J Appl Physiol 90:35–43CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lloyd R, Cooke CB (2000a) The oxygen consumption associated with unloaded walking and load carriage using two different backpack designs. Eur J Appl Physiol 81(6):486–492CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Lloyd R, Cooke CB (2000b) Relationships between physiological and postural adjustments to load carriage for rucksack designs. J Sports Sci 18:25–26Google Scholar
  24. Lyons J, Allsopp A, Bilzon J (2005) Influences of body composition upon the relative metabolic and cardiovascular demands of load carriage. Occup Med 55:380–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mackie HW, Legg SJ (2008) Postural and subjective responses to realistic schoolbag carriage. Ergonomics 51(2):217–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Maloiy GM, Heglund NC, Prager LM, Cavagna GA, Taylor CR (1986) Energetic costs of carrying loads: have African women discovered an economic way? Nature 319:668–669CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Malville NJ, Burns WC, Lim HA, Basnyat R (2001) Commercial porters of Eastern Nepal: health status, physical work capacity and energy expenditure. Am J Hum Biol 13:44–56CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Minetti AE, Formenti F, Ardigo LP (2006) Himalayan porter’s specialization: metabolic power, economy, efficiency and skill. Proc R Soc B 273:2791–2797CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Nag PK, Sen RN, Ray US (1979) Cardio-respiratory performance of porters carrying loads on a treadmill. Ergonomics 22(8):897–907CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Obusek JP, Harman EA, Frykman PN, Palmer CJ, Bills RK (1997) The relationship of backpack center of mass location to the metabolic cost of load carriage. Med Sci Sports Exerc 29(5):S205 Google Scholar
  31. Quesada PM, Mengelkoch LJ, Hale RC, Simon SR (2000) Biomechanical and metabolic effects of varying backpack loading on simulated marching. Ergonomics 43(3):293–309CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Rorke SL (1990) Selected factors influencing the “optimum” backpack load for hiking. S Afr J Res Sport Phys Educ Recreat 13:31–45Google Scholar
  33. Sharpe SR, Holt KG, Saltzman E, Wagenaar RC (2008) Effects of hip belt on transverse plane trunk coordination and stability during load carriage. J Biomech 41:968–976CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Soule RG, Goldman RF (1969) Energy costs of loads carried on the head, hands or feet. J Appl Physiol 27:687–690PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Stuempfle KJ, Drury DG, Wilson AL (2004) Effect of load position on physiological and perceptual responses during load carriage with an internal frame backpack. Ergonomics 47(7):784–789CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Taylor CR, Heglund NC, McMahon TA, Looney TR (1980) Energetic cost of generating muscular force during running. J Exp Biol 86:9–18Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Lloyd
    • 1
  • B. Parr
    • 2
  • S. Davies
    • 2
  • T. Partridge
    • 1
  • C. Cooke
    • 3
  1. 1.Division of Sport and Exercise SciencesUniversity of Abertay DundeeDundeeUK
  2. 2.Department of Sports ManagementCape Peninsula University of TechnologyCape TownSouth Africa
  3. 3.Carnegie Research InstituteLeeds Metropolitan UniversityLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations