Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27454125›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2016

Shooting Mechanisms in Nature: A Systematic Review.

Aimée Sakes, Marleen van der Wiel, Paul W J Henselmans, Johan L van Leeuwen, Dimitra Dodou, Paul Breedveld

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
9.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 100 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Fluid Ejections in Nature.Annual review of chemical and biomolecular engineering · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. A physical model of mantis shrimp for exploring the dynamics of ultrafast systems.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Aimée SakesDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
Marleen van der WielDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
Paul W J HenselmansDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
Johan L van LeeuwenExperimental Zoology Group, Wageningen Institute of Animal Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, the Netherlands.
Dimitra DodouDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
Paul BreedveldDepartment of Biomechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands.
Delft University of Technology · NLWageningen University & Research · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn nature, shooting mechanisms are used for a variety of purposes, including prey capture, defense, and reproduction. This review offers insight into the working principles of shooting mechanisms in fungi, plants, and animals in the light of the specific functional demands that these mechanisms fulfill.

methodsWe systematically searched the literature using Scopus and Web of Knowledge to retrieve articles about solid projectiles that either are produced in the body of the organism or belong to the body and undergo a ballistic phase. The shooting mechanisms were categorized based on the energy management prior to and during shooting.

resultsShooting mechanisms were identified with projectile masses ranging from 1·10-9 mg in spores of the fungal phyla Ascomycota and Zygomycota to approximately 10,300 mg for the ballistic tongue of the toad Bufo alvarius. The energy for shooting is generated through osmosis in fungi, plants, and animals or muscle contraction in animals. Osmosis can be induced by water condensation on the system (in fungi), or water absorption in the system (reaching critical pressures up to 15.4 atmospheres; observed in fungi, plants, and animals), or water evaporation from the system (reaching up to -197 atmospheres; observed in plants and fungi). The generated energy is stored as elastic (potential) energy in cell walls in fungi and plants and in elastic structures in animals, with two exceptions: (1) in the momentum catapult of Basidiomycota the energy is stored in a stalk (hilum) by compression of the spore and droplets and (2) in Sphagnum energy is mainly stored in compressed air. Finally, the stored energy is transformed into kinetic energy of the projectile using a catapult mechanism delivering up to 4,137 J/kg in the osmotic shooting mechanism in cnidarians and 1,269 J/kg in the muscle-powered appendage strike of the mantis shrimp Odontodactylus scyllarus. The launch accelerations range from 6.6g in the frog Rana pipiens to 5,413,000g in cnidarians, the launch velocities from 0.1 m/s in the fungal phylum Basidiomycota to 237 m/s in the mulberry Morus alba, and the launch distances from a few thousands of a millimeter in Basidiomycota to 60 m in the rainforest tree Tetraberlinia moreliana. The mass-specific power outputs range from 0.28 W/kg in the water evaporation mechanism in Basidiomycota to 1.97·109 W/kg in cnidarians using water absorption as energy source. DISCUSSION AND

conclusionsThe magnitude of accelerations involved in shooting is generally scale-dependent with the smaller the systems, discharging the microscale projectiles, generating the highest accelerations. The mass-specific power output is also scale dependent, with smaller mechanisms being able to release the energy for shooting faster than larger mechanisms, whereas the mass-specific work delivered by the shooting mechanism is mostly independent of the scale of the shooting mechanism. Higher mass-specific work-values are observed in osmosis-powered shooting mechanisms (≤ 4,137 J/kg) when compared to muscle-powered mechanisms (≤ 1,269 J/kg). The achieved launch parameters acceleration, velocity, and distance, as well as the associated delivered power output and work, thus depend on the working principle and scale of the shooting mechanism.

Indexed as

Biophysical PhenomenaAnimalsEnergy MetabolismFungiPlant Physiological PhenomenaPredatory Behavior

Identifiers

PMID27454125
PMCPMC4959704
OpenAlexW2490401601

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.