Federle Walter
Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EJ, UK.
J Exp Biol. 2006 Jul;209(Pt 14):2611-21. doi: 10.1242/jeb.02323.
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.
许多节肢动物和脊椎动物都拥有布满刚毛的跗骨黏附垫。蜥蜴、蜘蛛以及几个昆虫目类中“多毛”垫惊人的形态趋同,证明了这种设计在底物黏附方面的优势。早期对多毛黏附器官的功能解释集中在粗糙底物上的表现,在这种情况下,柔韧的刚毛能够实现更紧密的接触。近期的理论和实验研究表明,多毛设计还有助于实现自清洁特性、可控脱离以及增强黏附力。人们提出了几种观点来解释为何黏附力能达到最大值。其一,“力缩放”假说指出,当黏附力与接触面积呈线性比例缩放时,通过将接触区分成许多微观亚单元可增强黏附力。其二,“断裂力学”观点表明,当黏附接触的尺寸小于临界裂纹长度时,黏附力最大。其三,“黏附功”模型认为,由于刚毛的弯曲和拉伸以及脱离过程中相关的能量损耗,黏附力会增加。多毛黏附垫的几个形态特征可以通过在避免刚毛相互黏附(自缠结)的同时最大化黏附功的需求来解释。首先,若刚毛如大多数多毛垫那样朝脚尖方向倾斜且呈凸形,阵列应能实现更大的黏附力。其次,分支状刚毛形态不仅具有刚毛能适应不同长度尺度粗糙度的优势,还能防止自缠结并增加黏附功。根据“黏附功”模型预测,对于具有无分支刚毛的垫,通过将接触区分成越来越精细的亚接触来增加黏附力是行不通的,因为这会越来越多地导致自缠结。然而,如果刚毛是分支状的,接触分裂则可以增加黏附力。大型动物中刚毛密度更高这一现象已通过“力缩放”来解释。然而,现有数据可以通过刚毛分支的影响以及“湿”黏附系统和“干”黏附系统之间的根本差异来解释。由于昆虫使用黏附液,即使刚毛尖端相对钝圆,它们也能应对小规模的表面粗糙度,而蜥蜴和蜘蛛的干黏附系统则需要极其精细的末梢。