Advertisement

Biomechanics at the Microscale

  • Alexander E. Filippov
  • Stanislav N. Gorb
Chapter
  • 51 Downloads
Part of the Biologically-Inspired Systems book series (BISY, volume 16)

Abstract

Male and female genitalia usually evolve rather quickly and yield remarkable diversity in comparison with other characters. Since natural selection influences shapes indirectly through corresponding properties, links between genital features and their functional mechanisms are critically important, in order to understand evolutionary mechanisms of morphological diversity. In this chapter, we numerically modeled hyper-elongated male and female genitalia especially focusing on their physical properties previously observed in cassidine beetles. These male beetles bear an elongated flagellum and female genitalia have a helically coiled spermathecal duct including some reversal turns called knots. The flagellum was demonstrated to have stiffness gradient, which results in a specific mechanical behavior of the entire copulatory system, because the flagellum stiffness properties might influence its motion within the female spermathecal duct. These properties might be partially due to rubber-like protein resilin that is assumed to be an almost perfect elastomer in insects. Resilin is an ideal material for elastic joints that are subjected to repeated cyclical stress. During the lifetime of an insect, resilin shows neither tearing nor fatigue, when stressed within its natural limits. The resilin, almost unique among biological materials returns back to its original position, when the stress is relieved. In this chapter, the simple sphere-on-the-flat geometry was used in a microindentation experiment as one with the most precise determined boundary conditions. Then the mechanical response of resilin was simulated using a generalized Maxwell model with two characteristic time constants and alternatively using a 1D model with just one characteristic time constant. We also applied newly-developed method of dimension reduction allowing us utilization of functional model along with the generalized Maxwell model.

Supplementary material

Movie 7.1

(MP4 3095 kb)

Movie 7.2

(MP4 2380 kb)

References

  1. Ah-King M, Barron AB, Herberstein ME (2014) Genital evolution: why are females still understudied? PLoS Biol 12:e1001851PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersen SO (1963) Characterization of a new type of cross-linkage in resilin, a rubber-like protein. Biochim Biophys Acta 69:249–262PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Andersen SO, Weis-Fogh T (1964) Resilin. A rubberlike protein in arthropod cuticle. Adv Insect Physiol 2:1–65Google Scholar
  4. Appel E, Gorb SN (2011) Resilin-bearing wing vein joints in the dragonfly Epiophlebia superstes. Bioinspir Biomim 6:046006. (11pp)PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Arnqvist G (1998) Comparative evidence for the evolution of genitalia by sexual selection. Nature 393:784–786Google Scholar
  6. Arnqvist G, Danielsson I (1999) Copulatory behavior, genital morphology and male fertilization success in water striders. Evolution 53:147–156PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Arnqvist G, Rowe L (1995) Sexual conflict and arms races between the sexes: a morphological adaptation for control of mating in a female insect. Proc R Soc Lond B 261:123–127Google Scholar
  8. Bailey K, Weis-Fogh T (1961) Amino acid composition of a new rubber-like protein, resilin. Biochim Biophys Acta 48:452–459PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bennet-Clark HC, Lucey ECA (1967) The jump of the flea: a study of the energetics and a model of the mechanism. J Exp Biol 47:59–76PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennet-Clark H (2007) The first description of resilin. J Exp Biol 210:3879–3881PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Brennan LR, Prum RO, McCracken KG, Sorenson MD, Wilson RE, Birkhead TR (2007) Co-evolution of male and female genital morphology in waterfowl. PLoS One 5:e418Google Scholar
  12. Cheng L, Xia X, Scriven LE, Gerberich WW (2005) Spherical-tip indentation of viscoelastic material. Mech Mat 37:213–223Google Scholar
  13. Christensen RM (1982) Theory of viscoelasticity, 2nd edn. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Cordoba-Aguilar A (2005) Possible coevolution of male and female genital form and function in a calopterygid damselfly. J Evol Biol 18:132–137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Dougherty LR, Rahman IA, Burdfield-Steel ER, Greenway EV, Shuker DM (2015) Experimental reduction of intromittent organ length reduces male reproductive success in a bug. Proc R Soc Lond B 282:20150724Google Scholar
  16. Eberhard WG (1985) Sexual selection and animal genitalia. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  17. Elliott GF, Huxley AF, Weis-Fogh T (1965) On the structure of resilin. J Mol Biol 13:791–795Google Scholar
  18. Filippov AE, Kovalev AE, Matsumura Y, Gorb SN (2015) Male penile propulsion into spiraled spermathecal ducts of female chrysomelid beetles: a numerical simulation approach. J Theor Biol 384:140–146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Filippov AE, Kovalev AE, Matsumura Y, Gorb SN (2016) Stiffness gradient of the beetle penis facilitates propulsion in the spiraled female spermathecal duct. Sci Rep 6:27608PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Filippov AE, Popov VL (2007) Fractal Tomlinson model for mesoscopic friction: from microscopic velocity-dependent damping to macroscopic Coulomb friction. Phys Rev E 75:027103Google Scholar
  21. Geike T, Popov VL (2007) Mapping of three-dimensional contact problems into one dimension. Phys Rev E 76:036710Google Scholar
  22. Gorb SN (2004) The jumping mechanism of cicada Cercopis vulnerata (Auchenorrhyncha, Cercopidae): skeleton-muscle organisation, frictional surfaces, and inverse-kinematic model of leg movements. Arthr Str Dev 33:201–220Google Scholar
  23. Gorb SN, Beutel RG (2001) Evolution of locomotory attachment pads of hexapods. Naturwissenschaften 88:530–534PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Gorb SN, Filippov AE (2014) Fibrillar adhesion with no clusterisation: functional significance of material gradient along adhesive setae of insects. Beilstein J Nanotech 5:837–846Google Scholar
  25. Gorb SN, Beutel RG, Gorb EV, Yuekan J, Kastner V, Niederegger S, Popov VL, Scherge M (2002) Structural design and biomechanics of friction-based releasable attachment devices in insects. Integr Comp Biol 42:1127–1139PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. Gosline J, Lillie M, Carrington E, Guerette P, Ortlepp C, Savage K (2002) Elastic proteins: biological roles and mechanical properties. Phil Trans Roy Soc B 357:121–132Google Scholar
  27. Haas F, Gorb SN, Wootton RJ (2000a) Elastic joints in dermapteran hind wings: materials and wing folding. Arthr Str Dev 29:137–146Google Scholar
  28. Haas F, Gorb SN, Blickhan R (2000b) The function of resilin in beetle wings. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:1375–1381Google Scholar
  29. Holwell GI, Winnick C, Tregenza T, Herberstein ME (2009) Genital shape correlates with sperm transfer success in the praying mantis Ciulfina klassi (Insecta: Mantodea). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 64:617–625Google Scholar
  30. House CM, Simmons LW (2003) Genital morphology and fertilization success in the dung beetle Onthophagus taurus: an example of sexually selected male genitalia. Proc R Soc Lond B 270:447–455Google Scholar
  31. Hosken DJ, Stockley P (2004) Sexual selection and genital evolution. Trends Ecol Evol 19:87–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Jensen M, Weis-Fogh T (1962) Biology and physics of locust flight. V. Strength and elasticity of locust cuticle. Philos Trans R Soc B 254:137–169Google Scholar
  33. Kamimura Y (2013) Promiscuity and elongated sperm storage organs work cooperatively as a cryptic female choice mechanism in an earwig. Anim Behav 85:377–383Google Scholar
  34. Kothari VK, Rajkhowa R, Gupta VB (2001) Stress relaxation and inverse stress relaxation in silk fibers. J Appl Polym Sci 82:1147–1154Google Scholar
  35. van Lieshout E, Elgar MA (2010) Longer exaggerated male genitalia confer defensive sperm-competitive benefits in an earwig. Evol Ecol 25:351–362Google Scholar
  36. Kovalev AE. Filippov AE, Gorb SN (2018) Slow viscoelastic response of resilin. J Comp Physiol A 204:409–417Google Scholar
  37. Lombardi EC, Kaplan DL (1993) Preliminary characterization of resilin isolated from the cockroach, Periplaneta americana. Mater Res Soc Symp Proc 292:3–7Google Scholar
  38. Lyons RE, Nairn KM, Huson MG, Kim M, Dumsday G, Elvin CM (2009) Comparisons of recombinant resilin-like proteins: repetitive domains are sufficient to confer resilin-like properties. Biomacromolecules 10:3009–3014PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Macagno ALM, Pizzo A, Parzer HF, Palestrini C, Rolando A, Moczek AP (2011) Shape – but not size – codivergence between male and female copulatory structures in Onthophagus beetles. PLoS One 6:e28893PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  40. Matsumura Y, Machida R, Mashimo Y, Dallai R, Gottardo M, Kleinteich T, Michels J, Gorb SN, Beutel RG (2014) Two intromittent organs in Zorotypus caudelli (Insecta, Zoraptera): the paradoxical coexistence of an extremely long tube and a large spermatophore. Biol J Linn Soc 112:40–54Google Scholar
  41. Matushkina N, Gorb SN (2007) Mechanical properties of the endophytic ovipositor in damselflies (Zygoptera, Odonata) and their oviposition substrates. Zoology 110:167–175PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Michels J, Appel E, Gorb SN (2016) Functional diversity of resilin in Arthropoda. Beilstein J Nanotech 7:1241–1259Google Scholar
  43. Michels J, Gorb SN (2012) Detailed three-dimensional visualization of resilin in the exoskeleton of arthropods using confocal laser scanning microscopy. J Microsc 245:1–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Michels J, Gorb SN, Reinhardt K (2015) Reduction of female copulatory damage by resilin represents evidence for tolerance in sexual conflict. J R Soc Interface 12:20141107PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. Miller GT, Pitnck S (2002) Sperm-female coevolution in Drosophila. Science 298:1230–1233PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Misak HE, Sabelkin V, Miller L, Asmatulu R, Mall S (2013) Creep and inverse stress relaxation behaviors of carbon nanotube yarns. J Nanosci Nanotech 13:8331–8339Google Scholar
  47. Peisker H, Michels J, Gorb SN (2013) Evidence for a material gradient in the adhesive tarsal setae of the ladybird beetle Coccinella septempunctata. Nat Commun 4:1661PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Pohrt R, Popov VL, Filippov AE (2012) Normal contact stiffness of elastic solids with fractal rough surfaces for one- and three-dimensional systems. Phys Rev E 86:026710Google Scholar
  49. Popov VL (2010) Kontaktmechanik und Reibung: von der Nanotribologie bis zur Erdbebendynamik. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  50. Popov VL, Filippov AE (2012) Adhesive properties of contacts between elastic bodies with randomly rough self-affine surfaces: a simulation with the method of reduction of dimensionality. Phys Mesomech 15:324–329Google Scholar
  51. Rodriguez V (1994) Function of the spermathecal muscle in Chelymorpha alternans Boheman (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae). Physiol Entomol 19:198–202Google Scholar
  52. Rodriguez V (1995) Relation of flagellum length to reproductive success in male Chelymorpha alternans Boheman (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae). Coleopts Bull 49:201–205Google Scholar
  53. Rodriguez V, Windsor DM, Eberhard WG (2004) Tortoise beetle genitalia and demonstrations of a sexually selected advantage for flagellum length in Chelymorpha alternans (Chrysomelidae, Cassidini, Stolaini). In: Jolivet P, Santiago-Blay JA, Schmitt M (eds) New developments in the biology of Chrysomelidae. Academic, The Hague, pp 739–748Google Scholar
  54. Rowe L, Arnqvist G (2012) Sexual selection and the evolution of genital shape and complexity in water striders. Evolution 66:40–54PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Sakurai G, Himuro C, Kasuya E (2012) Intra-specific variation in the morphology and the benefit of large genital sclerites of males in the adzuki bean beetle (Callosobruchus chinensis). J Evol Biol 25:1291–1297PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Santangelo PG, Roland CM (1992) Chain ends and the Mullins effect in rubber. Rubber Chem Technol 65:965–972Google Scholar
  57. Seber GAF, Wild CJ (1989) Nonlinear regression. Wiley, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  58. Sentenská L, Pekár S, Lipke E, Michalik P, Uhl G (2015) Female control of mate plugging in a female-cannibalistic spider (Micaria sociabilis). BMC Evol Biol 15:18PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. Simmons LW (2014) Sexual selection and genital evolution. Aust Entomol 53:1–17Google Scholar
  60. Simmons LW, House CM, Hunt J, Garcia-Gonzalez F (2009) Evolutionary response to sexual selection in male genital morphology. Curr Biol 19:1442–1446PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. Tadler A (1999) Selection of a conspicuous male genitalic trait in the seedbug Lygaeus simulans. Proc R Soc Lond B 266:1773–1777Google Scholar
  62. Tanabe T, Sota T (2013) Both male and female novel traits promote the correlated evolution of genitalia between the sexes in an arthropod. Evolution 68:441–452PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Villavaso EJ (1975) Functions of the spermathecal muscle of the boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis. J Insect Physiol 21:1275–1278Google Scholar
  64. Weis-Fogh T (1960) A rubber-like protein in insect cuticle. J Exp Biol 37:889–907Google Scholar
  65. Weis-Fogh T (1961) Thermodynamic properties of resilin, a rubber-like protein. J Mol Biol 3:520–531Google Scholar
  66. Weng L, Chen X, Chen W (2007) Rheological characterization of in situ crosslinkable hydrogels formulated from oxidized dextran and N-carboxyethyl chitosan. Biomacromolecules 8:1109–11115PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. Willkommen J, Michels J, Gorb SN (2015) Functional morphology of the male caudal appendages of the damselfly Ischnura elegans (Zygoptera: Coenagrionidae). Arthr Struct Dev 44:289–300Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexander E. Filippov
    • 1
  • Stanislav N. Gorb
    • 2
  1. 1.Donetsk Institute for Physics and EngineeringDonetskUkraine
  2. 2.Zoological InstituteKiel UniversityKielGermany

Personalised recommendations