The same but different: setal arrays of anoles and geckos indicate alternative approaches to achieving similar adhesive effectiveness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The functional morphology of squamate fibrillar adhesive systems has been extensively investigated and has indirectly and directly influenced the design of synthetic counterparts. Not surprisingly, the structure and geometry of exemplar fibrils (setae) have been the subject of the bulk of the attention in such research, although variation in setal morphology along the length of subdigital adhesive pads has been implicated to be important in the effective functioning of these systems. Adhesive setal field configuration has been described for several geckos, but that of the convergent Anolis lizards, comprised of morphologically simpler fibrils, remains largely unexplored. Here, we examine setal morphology along the proximodistal axis of the digits of Anolis equestris and compare our findings to those for a model gecko, Gekko gecko. Consistent with previous work, we found that the setae of A. equestris are generally thinner, shorter, and present at higher densities than those of G. gecko and terminate in a single spatulate tip. Contrastingly, the setae of G. gecko are hierarchically branched in structure and carry hundreds of spatulate tips. Although the splitting of contacts into multiple smaller tips is predicted to increase the adhesive performance of a fiber compared to an unbranched one, we posited that the adhesive performance of G. gecko and A. equestris would be relatively similar when the configuration of the setal fields of each was accounted for. We found that, as in geckos, setal morphology of A. equestris follows a predictable pattern along the proximodistal axis of the pad, although there are several critical differences in the configuration of the setal fields of these two groups. Most notably, the pattern of variation in setal length of A. equestris is effectively opposite to that exhibited by G. gecko. This difference in clinal variation mirrors the difference in the direction in which the setal fields of anoles and geckos are peeled from the substrate, consistent with the hypothesis that biomechanical factors are the chief determinants of these patterns of variation. Future empirical work, however, is needed to validate this. Our findings set the stage for future comparative studies investigating the functional morphology of these convergent adhesive apparatuses. Such investigations will lead to an enhanced understanding of the interactions between form, function, and environment of fibril-based biological adhesive systems.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".