Liquid crystal models of biological materials and silk spinning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A review of thermodynamic, materials science, and rheological liquid crystal models is presented and applied to a wide range of biological liquid crystals, including helicoidal plywoods, biopolymer solutions, and in vivo liquid crystals. The distinguishing characteristics of liquid crystals (self-assembly, packing, defects, functionalities, processability) are discussed in relation to biological materials and the strong correspondence between different synthetic and biological materials is established. Biological polymer processing based on liquid crystalline precursors includes viscoelastic flow to form and shape fibers. Viscoelastic models for nematic and chiral nematics are reviewed and discussed in terms of key parameters that facilitate understanding and quantitative information from optical textures and rheometers. It is shown that viscoelastic modeling the silk spinning process using liquid crystal theories sheds light on textural transitions in the duct of spiders and silk worms as well as on tactoidal drops and interfacial structures. The range and consistency of the predictions demonstrates that the use of mesoscopic liquid crystal models is another tool to develop the science and biomimetic applications of mesogenic biological soft matter.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".