4.7 Article

The use of clamping grips and friction pads by tree frogs for climbing curved surfaces

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2016.2867

关键词

climbing; friction grip; adhesive pad; subarticular tubercle; tree frog

资金

  1. Max Planck Society (Germany)
  2. University of Glasgow
  3. The Royal Society (London) [IE140717]
  4. Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics
  5. atural Science Foundation (China)
  6. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51375232]
  7. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20141410]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Most studies on the adhesive mechanisms of climbing animals have addressed attachment against flat surfaces, yet many animals can climb highly curved surfaces, like twigs and small branches. Here we investigated whether tree frogs use a clamping grip by recording the ground reaction forces on a cylindrical object with either a smooth or anti-adhesive, rough surface. Furthermore, we measured the contact area of fore and hindlimbs against differently sized transparent cylinders and the forces of individual pads and subarticular tubercles in restrained animals. Our study revealed that frogs use friction and normal forces of roughly a similar magnitude for holding on to cylindrical objects. When challenged with climbing a non-adhesive surface, the compressive forces between opposite legs nearly doubled, indicating a stronger clamping grip. In contrast to climbing flat surfaces, frogs increased the contact area on all limbs by engaging not just adhesive pads but also subarticular tubercles on curved surfaces. Our force measurements showed that tubercles can withstand larger shear stresses than pads. SEM images of tubercles revealed a similar structure to that of toe pads including the presence of nano-pillars, though channels surrounding epithelial cells were less pronounced. The tubercles' smaller size, proximal location on the toes and shallow cells make them probably less prone to buckling and thus ideal for gripping curved surfaces.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据