↓ Skip to main content

Sticking under Wet Conditions: The Remarkable Attachment Abilities of the Torrent Frog, Staurois guttatus

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, September 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
9 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
14 X users
patent
1 patent
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
86 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Sticking under Wet Conditions: The Remarkable Attachment Abilities of the Torrent Frog, Staurois guttatus
Published in
PLOS ONE, September 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0073810
Pubmed ID
Authors

Thomas Endlein, W. Jon P. Barnes, Diana S. Samuel, Niall A. Crawford, Ang Bee Biaw, Ulmar Grafe

Abstract

Tree frogs climb smooth surfaces utilising capillary forces arising from an air-fluid interface around their toe pads, whereas torrent frogs are able to climb in wet environments near waterfalls where the integrity of the meniscus is at risk. This study compares the adhesive capabilities of a torrent frog to a tree frog, investigating possible adaptations for adhesion under wet conditions. We challenged both frog species to cling to a platform which could be tilted from the horizontal to an upside-down orientation, testing the frogs on different levels of roughness and water flow. On dry, smooth surfaces, both frog species stayed attached to overhanging slopes equally well. In contrast, under both low and high flow rate conditions, the torrent frogs performed significantly better, even adhering under conditions where their toe pads were submerged in water, abolishing the meniscus that underlies capillarity. Using a transparent platform where areas of contact are illuminated, we measured the contact area of frogs during platform rotation under dry conditions. Both frog species not only used the contact area of their pads to adhere, but also large parts of their belly and thigh skin. In the tree frogs, the belly and thighs often detached on steeper slopes, whereas the torrent frogs increased the use of these areas as the slope angle increased. Probing small areas of the different skin parts with a force transducer revealed that forces declined significantly in wet conditions, with only minor differences between the frog species. The superior abilities of the torrent frogs were thus due to the large contact area they used on steep, overhanging surfaces. SEM images revealed slightly elongated cells in the periphery of the toe pads in the torrent frogs, with straightened channels in between them which could facilitate drainage of excess fluid underneath the pad.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 86 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
France 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 80 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 23%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 16%
Student > Bachelor 14 16%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 9%
Other 14 16%
Unknown 8 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 37 43%
Engineering 12 14%
Environmental Science 9 10%
Materials Science 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 2%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 10 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 88. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2021.
All research outputs
#408,674
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#5,929
of 195,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,525
of 203,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#154
of 4,884 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 195,149 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 203,462 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,884 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.