Hymenoptera and biomimetic surfaces: insights and innovations

• Vinicius Marques Lopez,
• Carlo Polidori and
• Rhainer Guillermo Ferreira

Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2024, 15, 1333–1352, doi:10.3762/bjnano.15.107

• ]. This mechanism is composed of a rolled membrane positioned at the trailing edge of the forewing, accompanied by small hooks (or hamuli) arranged in a line along the leading edge of the hind wing, all attached to a vein at the leading edge of the hind wing where the hooks are embedded [123]. These hooks

• the total wing area, these hooks play a crucial role in continuously transferring forces between the wings, withstanding forces up to 180 times the insect’s body weight and 40 times the aerodynamic forces encountered during flight [123]. This robust design of the coupling mechanism is essential for

Aquatic versus terrestrial attachment: Water makes a difference

• Petra Ditsche and
• Adam P. Summers

Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2014, 5, 2424–2439, doi:10.3762/bjnano.5.252

• pressure difference at vacuum conditions can be ameliorated under water, due to the increasing pressure with water depth. Keywords: adhesion; biofilm; friction; hooks; suction; Introduction Attachment in animals, plants and microorganisms serves a variety of functions: the interconnection of body parts

• mechanisms, (2) the biological function and (3) the duration of attachment time, the attachment mechanisms have been divided into eight main functional principles: wet and dry adhesion, friction, suction and the mechanical principles hooks, clamps, locks and spacers [2]. We will discuss the differences

• between these fundamental principles when applied under water. In nature some animals combine these fixation principles, for example limpets use suction and glue, black fly larvae support their hooks by secretion and some squids combine suckers with hooks. Attachment is a two-body problem so there is

Dipole-driven self-organization of zwitterionic molecules on alkali halide surfaces

• Laurent Nony,
• Franck Bocquet,
• Franck Para,
• Frédéric Chérioux,
• Eric Duverger,
• Frank Palmino,
• Vincent Luzet and
• Christian Loppacher

Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 2012, 3, 285–293, doi:10.3762/bjnano.3.32

• substrate surface. We therefore conclude that the observed overlayer is a coincidence II epitaxy, when we follow the classification scheme by Hooks et al. [2]. The characteristics of such a type of epitaxy are that only some of the overlayer lattice points lie on primitive substrate lattice lines and that a