| Literature DB >> 21818328 |
Cecilia Boutry1, Milan Řezáč, Todd Alan Blackledge.
Abstract
Spider major ampullate silk is a high-performance biomaterial that has received much attention. However, most studies ignore plasticity in silk properties. A better understanding of silk plasticity could clarify the relative importance of chemical composition versus processing of silk dope for silk properties. It could also provide insight into how control of silk properties relates to spider ecology and silk uses. We compared silk plasticity (defined as variation in the properties of silk spun by a spider under different conditions) between three spider clades in relation to their anatomy and silk biochemistry. We found that silk plasticity exists in RTA clade and orbicularian spiders, two clades that differ in their silk biochemistry. Orbiculariae seem less dependent on external spinning conditions. They probably use a valve in their spinning duct to control friction forces and speed during spinning. Our results suggest that plasticity results from different processing of the silk dope in the spinning duct. Orbicularian spiders seem to display better control of silk properties, perhaps in relation to their more complex spinning duct valve.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21818328 PMCID: PMC3144891 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022467
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Simple phylogeny of the species used in this study.
Haplogynes are in green, RTA clade spiders in yellow and Orbiculariae in red.
Figure 2Speed of dropping Larinioides cornutus (Orbiculariae, in red) and Peucetia viridans (RTA clade spider, in blue).
Material properties of silk obtained under different spinning conditions from six spider species (average ± SE).
| Young's Modulus (GPa) | Yield Stress (MPa) | Yield Strain (mm/mm) | Ultimate Strength (MPa) | Extensibility (mm/mm) | Toughness (MPa) | |
|
| ||||||
| FDL | 10.5±2.8 | 344±67 | 0.036± 0.002 | 1107±215 | 0.238±0.022 | 144±29 |
| DDL | 11.2±1.0 | 354±41 | 0.036±0.003 | 1054±102 | 0.199±0.013 | 117±19 |
| WDL | 6.4±0.9 | 224±25 | 0.039±0.004 | 875±60 | 0.260±0.008 | 119±8 |
|
| ||||||
| FDL | 10.4±1.7 | 275±67 | 0.037±0.007 | 954±133 | 0.223±0.032 | 111±23 |
| DDL | 18.9±3.3 | 367±87 | 0.026±0.003 | 1439±124 | 0.215±0.012 | 198±34 |
| WDL | 20.2±2.1 | 428±58 | 0.024±0.003 | 1906±102 | 0.245±0.012 | 260±20 |
|
| ||||||
| FDL | 32.1±1.1 | 1283±105 | 0.043±0.003 | 1738±162 | 0.126±0.027 | 157±47 |
| DDL | 22.8±2.8 | 516±18 | 0.029±0.001 | 1450±153 | 0.218±0.021 | 208±25 |
| WDL | 18.9±2.2 | 497±56 | 0.030±0.002 | 1268±86 | 0.325±0.018 | 283±43 |
|
| ||||||
| DDL | 12.1±0.3 | 314±19 | 0.029±0.001 | 1062±144 | 0.308±0.025 | 183±42 |
| WDL | 9.3±1.0 | 245±35 | 0.030±0.001 | 937±144 | 0.380±0.027 | 204±25 |
|
| ||||||
| FDL | 18.4±0.9 | 518±60 | 0.028±0.001 | 1552±156 | 0.340±0.023 | 293±27 |
| DDL | 23.0±1.2 | 601±33 | 0.030±0.001 | 1667±141 | 0.268±0.019 | 284±36 |
| WDL | 17.3±1.2 | 449±31 | 0.030±0.002 | 1198±144 | 0.353±0.022 | 257±18 |
|
| ||||||
| FDL | 14.8±1.0 | 516±69 | 0.040±0.005 | 1972±65 | 0.207±0.009 | 222±13 |
| DDL | 17.3±1.6 | 392±29 | 0.029±0.002 | 1768±137 | 0.293±0.011 | 278±27 |
| WDL | 13.5±0.8 | 319±19 | 0.029±0.001 | 1759±102 | 0.346±0.010 | 293±20 |
| All species | ||||||
| FDL | 16.9±1.3 | 566±59 | 0.038±0.002 | 1555±87 | 0.240±0.014 | 202±15 |
| DDL | 18.0±1.0 | 433±22 | 0.030±0.001 | 1476±67 | 0.254±0.008 | 225±15 |
| WDL | 14.0±0.9 | 350±21 | 0.029±0.001 | 1370±78 | 0.310±0.011 | 238±13 |
Silk was collected by forcibly silking (FDL), by letting a spider spin while dropping (DDL) and by letting a spider spin while walking (WDL).
Figure 3Material properties of FDL (red diamonds), DDL (green squares) and WDL (blue triangles) spun by Haplogynes (Hap), RTA clade spiders (RTA) and Orbiculariae (Orb).
Asterisks represent significant differences within a species at α = 0.05.