ArticleFrontiers in zoology2019
Comparative and functional analysis of the digital mucus glands and secretions of tree frogs.
Article in Frontiers in zoology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Salamander ecomorphology reveals a unique suite of climbing adaptations.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- From Dry to Wet, the Nature Inspired Strong Attachment Surfaces and Their Medical Applications.ACS nano · 2025Review
- The adaptive microbiome hypothesis and immune interactions in amphibian mucus.Developmental and comparative immunology · 2023Review
- Stiff skin, soft core: soft backings enhance the conformability and friction of fibre-reinforced adhesives.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Studying Stickiness: Methods, Trade-Offs, and Perspectives in Measuring Reversible Biological Adhesion and Friction.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Design of Tree-Frog-Inspired Adhesives.Integrative and comparative biology · 2020Review
- Molecular insights into the powerful mucus-based adhesion of limpets (Open biology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMucus and mucus glands are important features of the amphibian cutis. In tree frogs, the mucus glands and their secretions are crucial components of the adhesive digital pads of these animals. Despite a variety of hypothesised functions of these components in tree frog attachment, the functional morphology of the digital mucus glands and the chemistry of the digital mucus are barely known. Here, we use an interdisciplinary comparative approach to analyse these components, and discuss their roles in tree frog attachment.
resultsUsing synchrotron micro-computer-tomography, we discovered in the arboreal frog
conclusionsThe presence of a digital mucus gland cluster in various anuran families, as well as the absence of differences in the mucus chemistry between arboreal and non-arboreal frog species indicate an adaptation towards generic functional requirements as well as to attachment-related requirements. Overall, this study contributes to the understanding of the role of glands and their secretions in tree frog attachment and in bioadhesion in general, as well as the evolution of anurans.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.