ArticleInterface focus2024
Diverse material properties and morphology of moth proboscises relates to the feeding habits of some macromoth and other lepidopteran lineages.
Article in Interface focus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mandible composition and properties in two selected praying mantises (Insecta, Mantodea).Anatomical record (Hoboken, N.J. : 2007) · 2026Article
- Invasive ambrosia beetles have zinc-enriched mandibles: support for the metal-prioritization hypothesis and insights into the mechanisms of metal deposition.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Morphology and material composition of raptorial foreleg cuticles in praying mantises Gongylus gongylodes and Sphodromantis lineola.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The Right Tool for the Job: A Review of Insect Mouthparts as a Tool Kit for Biomimetic Studies.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Article
- Diverse material properties and morphology of moth proboscises relates to the feeding habits of some macromoth and other lepidopteran lineages.Interface focus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Insects have evolved unique structures that host a diversity of material and mechanical properties, and the mouthparts (proboscis) of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) are no exception. Here, we examined proboscis morphology and material properties from several previously unstudied moth lineages to determine if they relate to flower visiting and non-flower visiting feeding habits. Scanning electron microscopy and three-dimensional imaging were used to study proboscis morphology and assess surface roughness patterns on the galeal surface, respectively. Confocal laser scanning microscopy was used to study patterns of cuticular autofluorescence, which was quantified with colour analysis software. We found that moth proboscises display similar autofluorescent signals and morphological patterns in relation to feeding habits to those previously described for flower and non-flower visiting butterflies. The distal region of proboscises of non-flower visitors is brush-like for augmented capillarity and exhibited blue autofluorescence, indicating the possible presence of resilin and increased flexibility. Flower visitors have smoother proboscises and show red autofluorescence, an indicator of high sclerotization, which is adaptive for floral tube entry. We propose the lepidopteran proboscis as a model structure for understanding how insects have evolved a suite of morphological and material adaptations to overcome the challenges of acquiring fluids from diverse sources.
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.