Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27274801›Full record

ArticleInterface focus2016

Point of impact: the effect of size and speed on puncture mechanics.

P S L Anderson, J LaCosse, M Pankow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Interface focus, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Sharpening our understanding of saber-tooth biomechanics.Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2025
    Review
  4. Kinematics of strikes in venomous snakes.The Journal of experimental biology · 2025
    Article
  5. Being thin-skinned can still reduce damage from dynamic puncture.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. The puncture mechanics: an example from the bed bugJournal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Grand Challenges in Comparative Tooth Biology.Integrative and comparative biology · 2020
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

P S L AndersonDepartment of Biology , Duke University , Durham, NC 27708 , USA.
J LaCosseDepartment of Physics , Charles E. Jordan High School , Durham, NC 27707 , USA.
M PankowDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering , North Carolina State University , Raleigh, NC 27695 , USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of high-speed puncture mechanics for prey capture has been documented across a wide range of organisms, including vertebrates, arthropods, molluscs and cnidarians. These examples span four phyla and seven orders of magnitude difference in size. The commonality of these puncture systems offers an opportunity to explore how organisms at different scales and with different materials, morphologies and kinematics perform the same basic function. However, there is currently no framework for combining kinematic performance with cutting mechanics in biological puncture systems. Our aim here is to establish this framework by examining the effects of size and velocity in a series of controlled ballistic puncture experiments. Arrows of identical shape but varying in mass and speed were shot into cubes of ballistic gelatine. Results from high-speed videography show that projectile velocity can alter how the target gel responds to cutting. Mixed models comparing kinematic variables and puncture patterns indicate that the kinetic energy of a projectile is a better predictor of penetration than either momentum or velocity. These results form a foundation for studying the effects of impact on biological puncture, opening the door for future work to explore the influence of morphology and material organization on high-speed cutting dynamics.

Indexed as

cuttingenergyprey capturepuncturevelocity

Identifiers

PMID27274801
PMCPMC4843624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.