ArticleACS omega2020
A Comparative Study of Crystallography and Defect Structure of Corneal Nipple Array in
Article in ACS omega, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Smart Bio-Nanocoatings with Simple Post-Synthesis Reversible Adjustment.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Laser-based 3D printing and optical characterization of optical micro-nanostructures inspired by nocturnal insects compound eyes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Moth and butterfly ommatidial nanostructures have been extensively studied for their anti-reflective properties. Especially, from the point of view of sub-wavelength anti-reflection phenomena, the moth eye structures are the archetype example. Here, a comparative analysis of corneal nipples in moth eye (both Male and Female) and butterfly eye (both Male and Female) is given. The surface of moth(Male and Female) and butterfly(Male and Female) eye is defined with regularly arranged hexagonal facets filled with corneal nipples. A detailed analysis using high-resolution scanning electron microscopy images show the intricate hexagonal arrangement of corneal nipples within the individual hexagonal facet. Individual nipples in moth are circular with an average diameter of about 140/165 nm (Male/Female) and average internipple separation of 165 nm. The moth eye show the ordered arrangement of the corneal nipples and the butterfly eye (Male/Female) show an even more complex arrangement of the nipples. Structurally, the corneal nipples in both male and female butterflies are not circular but are polygons with 5, 6, and 7 sides. The average center-to-center separation in the butterfly(Male/Female) is about 260 nm/204 nm, respectively. We find that these corneal nipples are organized into much more dense hexagonal packing with the internipple (edge-to-edge) separation ranging from 20 to 25 nm. Each hexagonal facet is divided into multiple grains separated by boundaries spanning one or two crystallographic defects. These defects are seen in both moth and butterfly. These are typical 5-coordinated and 7-coordinated defect sites typical for a solid-state material with the hexagonal atomic arrangement. Even though the isolated defects are a rarity, interwoven (7-5) defects form a grain boundary between perfectly ordered grains. These defects introduce a low-angle dislocation, and a detailed analysis of the defects is done. The butterfly eye (Male/Female) is defined with extremely high-density corneal nipple with no apparent grains. Each corneal nipple is a polygon with "
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.