Literature DB >> 16809452

Why are so many adhesive pads hairy?

Walter Federle1.   

Abstract

Many arthropods and vertebrates possess tarsal adhesive pads densely covered with setae. The striking morphological convergence of ;hairy' pads in lizards, spiders and several insect orders demonstrates the advantage of this design for substrate adhesion. Early functional explanations of hairy adhesive organs focused on the performance on rough substrates, where flexible setae can make more intimate contact. Recent theoretical and experimental work shows that the hairy design can also help to achieve self-cleaning properties, controllable detachment and increased adhesion. Several arguments have been proposed to explain why adhesive forces are maximised. First, the ;Force scaling' hypothesis states that when adhesive forces scale linearly with the dimensions of the contact, adhesion is increased by dividing the contact zone into many microscopic subunits. Second, the ;Fracture mechanics' argument implies that adhesion is maximised when the size of adhesive contacts is smaller than the critical crack length. Third, the ;Work of adhesion' model suggests that adhesion increases due to the bending and stretching of setae and associated energy losses during detachment. Several morphological traits of hairy adhesive pads can be explained by the need to maximise the work of adhesion, while avoiding the sticking of setae to each other (self-matting). Firstly, if setae are oblique and convex toward the foot tip as typical of most hairy pads, arrays should achieve greater adhesion. Secondly, a branched seta morphology not only confers the advantage that setae can adapt to roughness at different length scales but also prevents self-matting and increases the work of adhesion. It is predicted from the ;Work of adhesion' model that adhesion of pads with unbranched setae cannot be increased by subdividing the contact zone into ever finer subcontacts, because this would increasingly cause self-matting. However, contact splitting can increase adhesion if setae are branched. The greater density of setae in large animals has been interpreted by ;Force scaling'. However, the existing data can be explained by the effect of seta branching and by a fundamental difference between ;wet' and ;dry' adhesive systems. As insects employ adhesive fluids, they can cope with small-scale surface roughness even with relatively blunt seta tips, whereas the dry systems of lizards and spiders require extremely fine endings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16809452     DOI: 10.1242/jeb.02323

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Biol        ISSN: 0022-0949            Impact factor:   3.312


  43 in total

1.  Slippery pores: anti-adhesive effect of nanoporous substrates on the beetle attachment system.

Authors:  E V Gorb; N Hosoda; C Miksch; S N Gorb
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 4.118

2.  Why do insects have such a high density of flow-sensing hairs? Insights from the hydromechanics of biomimetic MEMS sensors.

Authors:  Jérôme Casas; Thomas Steinmann; Gijs Krijnen
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 4.118

3.  Towards a nanomechanical basis for temporary adhesion in barnacle cyprids (Semibalanus balanoides).

Authors:  In Yee Phang; Nick Aldred; Anthony S Clare; G Julius Vancso
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2008-04-06       Impact factor: 4.118

4.  Pushing versus pulling: division of labour between tarsal attachment pads in cockroaches.

Authors:  Christofer J Clemente; Walter Federle
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2008-06-07       Impact factor: 5.349

5.  Frictional and elastic energy in gecko adhesive detachment.

Authors:  Nick Gravish; Matt Wilkinson; Kellar Autumn
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2008-03-06       Impact factor: 4.118

6.  Phylogenetic analysis of the scaling of wet and dry biological fibrillar adhesives.

Authors:  A M Peattie; R J Full
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2007-11-13       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Ultrastructure and physical properties of an adhesive surface, the toe pad epithelium of the tree frog, Litoria caerulea White.

Authors:  Ingo Scholz; W Jon P Barnes; Joanna M Smith; Werner Baumgartner
Journal:  J Exp Biol       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.312

Review 8.  Functional demands of dynamic biological adhesion: an integrative approach.

Authors:  Anne M Peattie
Journal:  J Comp Physiol B       Date:  2008-10-29       Impact factor: 2.200

9.  Experimental evidence for friction-enhancing integumentary modifications of chameleons and associated functional and evolutionary implications.

Authors:  Eraqi R Khannoon; Thomas Endlein; Anthony P Russell; Kellar Autumn
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Sticking like sticky tape: tree frogs use friction forces to enhance attachment on overhanging surfaces.

Authors:  Thomas Endlein; Aihong Ji; Diana Samuel; Ning Yao; Zhongyuan Wang; W Jon P Barnes; Walter Federle; Michael Kappl; Zhendong Dai
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2013-01-16       Impact factor: 4.118

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.