Understanding the challenges faced by organisms moving within their environment is essential to comprehending the evolution of locomotor morphology and habitat use. Geckos have developed adhesive toe pads that enable exploitation of a wide range of microhabitats. These toe pads, and their adhesive mechanisms, have typically been studied using a range of artificial substrates, usually significantly smoother than those available in nature. Although these studies have been fundamental in understanding the mechanisms of attachment in geckos, it is unclear whether gecko attachment simply gradually declines with increased roughness as some researchers have suggested, or whether the interaction between the gekkotan adhesive system and surface roughness produces nonlinear relationships. To understand ecological challenges faced in their natural habitats, it is essential to use test surfaces that are more like surfaces used by geckos in nature. We tested gecko shear force (i.e., frictional force) generation as a measure of clinging performance on three artificial substrates. We selected substrates that exhibit microtopographies with peak‐to‐valley heights similar to those of substrates used in nature, to investigate performance on a range of smooth surfaces (glass), and fine‐grained (fine sandpaper) to rough (coarse sandpaper). We found that shear force did not decline monotonically with roughness, but varied nonlinearly among substrates. Clinging performance was greater on glass and coarse sandpaper than on fine sandpaper, and clinging performance was not significantly different between glass and coarse sandpaper. Our results demonstrate that performance on different substrates varies, probably depending on the underlying mechanisms of the adhesive apparatus in geckos.

Background Fitness is strongly related to locomotor performance, which can determine success in foraging, mating, and other critical activities. Locomotor performance on different substrates is likely to require different abilities, so we expect alignment between species’ locomotor performance and the habitats they use in nature. In addition, we expect behaviour to enhance performance, such that animals will use substrates on which they perform well. Methods We examined the associations between habitat selection and performance in three species of Oedura geckos, including two specialists, (one arboreal, and one saxicolous), and one generalist species, which used both rocks and trees. First, we described their microhabitat use in nature (tree and rock type) for these species, examined the surface roughnesses they encountered, and selected materials with comparable surface microtopographies (roughness measured as peak-to-valley heights) to use as substrates in lab experiments quantifying behavioural substrate preferences and clinging performance. Results The three Oedura species occupied different ecological niches and used different microhabitats in nature, and the two specialist species used a narrower range of surface roughnesses compared to the generalist. In the lab, Oedura geckos preferred substrates (coarse sandpaper) with roughness characteristics similar to substrates they use in nature. Further, all three species exhibited greater clinging performance on preferred (coarse sandpaper) substrates, although the generalist used fine substrates in nature and had good performance capabilities on fine substrates as well. Conclusion We found a relationship between habitat use and performance, such that geckos selected microhabitats on which their performance was high. In addition, our findings highlight the extensive variation in surface roughnesses that occur in nature, both among and within microhabitats.

No abstract

Skin provides functions such as protection and prevention of water loss. In some taxa the outer surface of skin has been modified to form structures that enable attachment to various surfaces. Constant interaction with surfaces is likely to cause damage to these attachment systems and reduce function. It seems logical that when skin is shed via ecdysis, its effectiveness may increase, through repair of damage or other rejuvenating mechanisms. We address two questions using three diplodactylid geckos as model species: (i) does repeated mechanical damage affect clinging ability in geckos to the point that they cannot support their own body weight? (ii) Does use without induced damage reduce effectiveness of the attachment system, and if so, does ecdysis restore clinging ability? We found that repeated damage reduced clinging ability in all three species, although at different rates. Additionally, use reduced clinging ability over time when no apparent damage was incurred. Clinging ability increased after ecdysis in all three species, both when damage was specially induced, and when it was not. After use without induced damage, the increase in clinging ability after ecdysis was statistically significant in two of three species. Our findings show that use decreases clinging ability, and mechanical damage also effects geckos’ capacity to exert shear forces consistently. Thus, ecdysis improves clinging ability, in both scenarios where damage is induced, and more generally. In addition to the physiological functions provided by skin, our study highlights an important function of ecdysis in a speciose vertebrate group.

No abstract