The behaviour on impaction by solids of some common cirripedes and relation to their normal habitat

Barnes, H.; Read, Richard; Topinka, J. A.

doi:10.1016/0022-0981(70)90030-4

Cited by 23 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Analyzing impact in terms of the coefficient of restitution provides a significant advancement over methods previously used by biologists, which were limited to determining the amount of impact energy necessary to break a structure (Barnes et al, 1970;Pentcheff, 1991;Shanks and Wright, 1986;Strathmann, 1981). Breaking strength is not necessarily the most relevant material property, particularly given that many animals operate with significant safety factors (Biewener, 2003;Hahn and LaBarbera, 1993).…”

Section: Interpretation Of the Coefficient Of Restitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dropping weights on barnacles led Shanks and Wright (Shanks and Wright, 1986) to demonstrate that breaking strength and shell fracture patterns were species specific, and that aggregations of barnacles were more resistant to impact than solitary animals. This same method allowed other authors to determine that barnacle species living in areas exposed to waveborne debris are less prone to damage from impacts than species living in protected areas (Barnes et al, 1970;Pentcheff, 1991). In addition to these few invertebrate examples, bone impact mechanics have been studied extensively (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ritualized fighting and biological armor: the impact mechanics of the mantis shrimp's telson

Taylor

Patek

2010

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Resisting impact and avoiding injury are central to survival in situations ranging from the abiotic forces of crashing waves to biotic collisions with aggressive conspecifics. Although impacts and collisions in biology are ubiquitous, most studies focus on the material properties of biological structures under static loading. Here, we examine the mechanical impact properties of the mantis shrimp's telson, a piece of abdominal armor that withstands repeated, intense impacts from the potent hammer-like appendages used by conspecifics during ritualized fighting. We measured the coefficient of restitution, an index of elasticity, of the telson and compared it with that of an adjacent abdominal segment that is not impacted. We found that the telson behaves more like an inelastic punching bag than an elastic trampoline, dissipating 69% of the impact energy. Furthermore, although the abdominal segment provides no mechanical correlates with size, the telson's coefficient of restitution, displacement and impact duration all correlate with body size. The telson's mineralization patterns were determined through micro-CT (Computed Tomography) and correspond to the mechanical behavior of the telson during impact. The mineralized central region of the telson ‘punched’ inward during an impact whereas the surrounding areas provided elasticity owing to their reduced mineralization. Thus, the telson effectively dissipates impact energy while potentially providing the size-related information crucial to its role in conspecific assessment. This study reveals the mechanical infrastructure of impact resistance in biological armor and opens a new window to the biomechanical underpinnings of animal behavior and assessment.

show abstract

Section: Interpretation Of the Coefficient Of Restitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ritualized fighting and biological armor: the impact mechanics of the mantis shrimp's telson

Taylor

Patek

2010

Journal of Experimental Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…amphitrite has a rather ingenious joint system around the periphery, similar to dovetail joints, attaching the parietes to the base. Description of these buttressed, dovetail structures, their interlocking features and the strength of various barnacle shells are well described in the papers of Murdock & Currey [20] and Barnes et al [19]. While musculature is certainly involved, the presence of this rigid buttressing system can be easily demonstrated (figure 2d ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Barnacles resist removal by crack trapping

Hui

Long

Wahl

et al. 2011

J. R. Soc. Interface.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We study the mechanics of pull-off of a barnacle adhering to a thin elastic layer which is bonded to a rigid substrate. We address the case of barnacles having acorn shell geometry and hard, calcarious base plates. Pull-off is initiated by the propagation of an interface edge crack between the base plate and the layer. We compute the energy release rate of this crack as it grows along the interface using a finite element method. We also develop an approximate analytical model to interpret our numerical results and to give a closedform expression for the energy release rate. Our result shows that the resistance of barnacles to interfacial failure arises from a crack-trapping mechanism.

show abstract

“…The mechanical properties of the shell material itself do not appear to vary appreciably, even between species (Murdock and Currey 1978). Barnes et al (1970) and Murdock and Currey (1978) demonstrated that the construction of the sutures between the shell plates is important in resistance to crushing. However, Otway and Anderson (1985) have demonstrated that suture construction remains constant within a species between populations exposed to differing degrees of wave action, despite variation in other features.…”

Section: Balanus Glandulamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With the exception of Shanks and Wright (/986), prior studies have used slow compression exerted by material testing machines (Murdock and Currey /978, Gubbay 1983) or an unknown number of multiple impacts (Barnes et al 1970). Brittle solids (such as carbonate shells) may behave differently under different rates of loading and may sustain cumulative damage from multiple impacts before failing (Wainwright et al 1976), making such methods less comparable to impacts by debris.…”

Section: Performance Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance to crushing from wave-borne debris in the barnacleBalanus glandula

Pentcheff

1991

Mar. Biol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Barnacles of the same species (Balanus glandula) show differences both in shell morphology and in their ability to resist crushing from impact at two sites within 8 km of each other which differ in their natural exposure to wave-borne debris (Cattle Point and False Bay, San Juan Island, Washington, USA). In studies performed in 1987, barnacles with shells of a given base diameter at the site exposed to more impact (Cattle Point) were found to have smaller bodies, shorter and thicker shells, and a more protected placement of their opercular valves than barnacles at the protected site. When tested with a standard impact, barnacles from the exposed site were more resistant to crushing both on the first impact and (for those surviving that test) on a second impact 2 wk later. The morphological differences between the two populations may be due to a combination of different shell:body growth rate ratios at the two sites plus passive remodelling of the exposed barnacles by small impacts. The morphological changes at the exposed site, although gained passively, fortuitously provide improved performance in resisting crushing from impact.

show abstract

The behaviour on impaction by solids of some common cirripedes and relation to their normal habitat

Cited by 23 publications

References 6 publications

Ritualized fighting and biological armor: the impact mechanics of the mantis shrimp's telson

Ritualized fighting and biological armor: the impact mechanics of the mantis shrimp's telson

Barnacles resist removal by crack trapping

Resistance to crushing from wave-borne debris in the barnacleBalanus glandula

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About