Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T15:31:52.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Calamistrum of the Feather-Legged Spider Uloborus plumipes Investigated by Focused Ion Beam and Scanning Electron Microscopy (FIB–SEM) Tomography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2018

Alexander Heiss Open the ORCID record for Alexander Heiss [Opens in a new window] ,
Daesung Park  and
Anna-Christin Joel
Alexander Heiss*
Affiliation:
The Research Institute for Precious Metals and Metals Chemistry (fem), Katharinenstrasse 17, 73525 Schwaebisch Gmuend, Germany
Daesung Park
Affiliation:
Central Facility for Electron Microscopy, RWTH Aachen University, Ahornstrasse 55, 52074 Aachen, Germany
Anna-Christin Joel
Affiliation:
Institute for Biology II, RWTH Aachen University, Worringerweg 3, 52074 Aachen, Germany Westphalian Institute of Biomimetics, Westphalian University of Applied Science, Muensterstrasse 265, 46397 Bocholt, Germany
*
Author for correspondence: Alexander Heiss, E-mail: alexander.heiss@post.rwth-aachen.de
Get access

Abstract

Spiders are natural specialists in fiber processing. In particular, cribellate spiders manifest this ability as they produce a wool of nanofibers to capture prey. During its production they deploy a sophisticated movement of their spinnerets to darn in the fibers as well as a comb-like row of setae, termed calamistrum, on the metatarsus which plays a key role in nanofiber processing. In comparison to the elaborate nanofiber extraction and handling process by the spider’s calamistrum, the human endeavors of spinning and handling of artificial nanofibers is still a primitive technical process. An implementation of biomimetics in spinning technology could lead to new materials and applications. Despite the general progress in related fields of nanoscience, the expected leap forward in spinning technology depends on a better understanding of the specific shapes and surfaces that control the forces at the nanoscale and that are involved in the mechanical processing of the nanofibers, respectively. In this study, the authors investigated the morphology of the calamistrum of the cribellate spider Uloborus plumipes. Focused ion beam and scanning electron microscopy tomography provided a good image contrast and the best trade-off between investigation volume and spatial resolution. A comprehensive three-dimensional model is presented and the putative role of the calamistrum in nanofiber processing is discussed.

Keywords

cribellate spidersetaenanofiber processingcapture threadFIB–SEM tomography
Type
Biological Science Applications
Information
Microscopy and Microanalysis , Volume 24 , Issue 2 , April 2018 , pp. 139 - 146
Copyright
© Microscopy Society of America 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Current address: University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5050, USA.

References

Askarieh, G, Hedhammar, M, Nordling, K, Saenz, A, Casals, C, Rising, A, Johansson, J and Knight, SD (2010) Self-assembly of spider silk proteins is controlled by a pH-sensitive relay. Nature 465, 236–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bott, RA, Baumgartner, W, Bräunig, P, Menzel, F and Joel, A-C (2017) Adhesion enhancement of cribellate capture threads by epicuticular waxes of the insect prey sheds new light on spider web evolution. Proc R Soc B 284. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2017.0363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Breiman, L (2001) Random forests. Mach Learn 45, 5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, X, Shao, Z and Vollrath, F (2006) The spinning processes for spider silk. Soft Matter 2, 448–451.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cretoiu, D, Gherghiceanu, M, Hummel, E, Zimmermann, H, Simionescu, O and Popescu, LM (2015) FIB-SEM tomography of human skin telocytes and their extracellular vesicles. J Cell Mol Med 19, 714–722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eisoldt, L, Smith, A and Scheibel, T (2011) Decoding the secrets of spider silk. Mater Today 14, 80–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedrich, VL and Langer, RM (1969) Fine structure of cribellate spider silk. Am Zool 9, 91–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griswold, CE, Coddington, JA, Hormiga, G and Scharff, N (1998) Phylogeny of the orb-web building spiders (Araneae, Orbiculariae: Deinopoidea, Araneoidea). Zool J Linn Soc 123, 1–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, M, Frank, E, Holmes, G, Pfahringer, B, Reutemann, P and Witten, IH (2009) The WEKA data mining software: An update. SIGKDD Explor 11, 10–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawthorn, AC and Opell, BD (2003) Van der Waals and hygroscopic forces of adhesion generated by spider capture threads. J Exp Biol 206, 3905–3911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heymann, JA, Hayles, M, Gestmann, I, Giannuzzi, LA, Lich, B and Subramaniam, S (2006) Site-specific 3D imaging of cells and tissues with a dual beam microscope. J Struct Biol 155, 63–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huber, BA and Fleckenstein, N (2008) Comb-hairs on the fourth tarsi in pholcid spiders (Araneae, Pholcidae). J Arachnol 36, 232–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joel, A-C and Baumgartner, W (2017) Nanofibre production in spiders without electric charge. J Exp Biol 220, 2243–2249.Google ScholarPubMed
Joel, A-C, Kappel, P, Adamova, H, Baumgartner, W and Scholz, I (2015) Cribellate thread production in spiders: Complex processing of nano-fibres into a functional capture thread. Arthropod Struct Dev 44, 568–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Joel, A-C, Scholz, I, Orth, L, Kappel, P and Baumgartner, W (2016) Morphological adaptation of the calamistrum to the cribellate spinning process in Deinopoidae (Uloboridae, Deinopidae). R Soc Open Sci 3, 150617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, H, Mingard, K and Cox, D (2014) Investigation of slice thickness and shape milled by a focused ion beam for three-dimensional reconstruction of microstructures. Ultramicroscopy 139, 20–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kreshuk, A, Straehle, CN, Sommer, C, Koethe, U, Cantoni, M, Knott, G and Hamprecht, FA (2011) Automated detection and segmentation of synaptic contacts in nearly isotropic serial electron microscopy images. PLoS One 6, 1–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kronenberger, K and Vollrath, F (2015) Spiders spinning electrically charged nano-fibres. Biol Lett 11, 20140813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mizutani, R and Suzuki, Y (2012) X-ray microtomography in biology. Micron 43, 104–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Möbus, G and Inkson, BJ (2007) Nanoscale tomography in materials science. Mater Today 10, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mokso, R, Quaroni, L, Marone, F, Irvine, S, Vila-Comamala, J, Blanke, A and Stampanoni, M (2012) X-ray mosaic nanotomography of large microorganisms. J Struct Biol 177, 233–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nunez-Iglesias, J, Kennedy, R, Plaza, SM, Chakraborty, A and Katz, WT (2014) Graph-based Active Learning of Agglomeration (GALA): a Python library to segment 2D and 3D neuroimages. Front Neuroinform 8, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Opell, BD (1989) Functional associations between the cribellum spinning plate and capture threads of Miagrammopes animotus (Araneida, Uloboridae). Zoomorphology 108, 263–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Opell, BD (1994) The ability of spider cribellar prey capture thread to hold insects with different surface features. Funct Ecol 8, 145–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Opell, BD (1995) Ontogenetic changes in cribellum spigot number and cribellar prey capture thread stickiness in the spider family Uloboridae. J Morphol 224, 47–56.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Opell, BD, Sandidge, JS and Bond, JE (2000) Exploring functional associations between spider cribella and calmistra. J Arachnol 28, 43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, HM (1984) The spinning apparatus of Uloboridae in relation to the structure and construction of capture threads (Arachnida, Araneida). Zoomorphology 104, 96–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rising, A and Johansson, J (2015) Toward spinning artificial spider silk. Nat Chem Biol 11, 309–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Römer, L and Scheibel, T (2008) The elaborate structure of spider silk. Prion 2, 154–161.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schindelin, J, Arganda-Carreras, I, Frise, E, Kaynig, V, Longair, M, Pietzsch, T, Preibisch, S, Rueden, C, Saalfeld, S, Schmid, B, Tinevez, JY, White, DJ, Hartenstein, V, Eliceiri, K, Tomancak, P and Cardona, A (2012) Fiji: An open-source platform for biological-image analysis. Nat Methods 9, 676–682.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidel, A, Liivak, O, Calve, S, Adaska, J, Ji, G, Yang, Z, Grubb, D, Zax, DB and Jelinski, LW (2000) Regenerated spider silk: Processing, properties, and structure. Macromolecules 33, 775–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shao, Z, Vollrath, F, Yang, Y and Thøgersen, H (2003) Structure and behavior of regenerated spider silk. Macromolecules 36, 1157–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shearer, T, Bradley, RS, Hidalgo-Bastida, LA, Sherratt, MJ and Cartmell, SH (2016) Three-dimensional visualisation of soft biological structures by X-ray computed micro-tomography. J Cell Sci 129, 2483–2492.Google ScholarPubMed
Staniewicz, L and Midgley, PA (2015) Machine learning as a tool for classifying electron tomographic reconstructions. Adv Struct Chem Imaging 1, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, LA, Bradley, RS, Withers, PJ, Newton, VL, Watson, REB, Austin, C and Sherratt, MJ (2015) Morphological characterisation of unstained and intact tissue micro-architecture by X-ray computed micro- and nano-tomography. Sci Rep 5, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wecker, S, Hörnschemeyer, T and Hoehn, M (2002) Investigation of insect morphology by MRI: Assessment of spatial and temporal resolution. Magn Reson Imaging 20, 105–111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Westneat, MW, Socha, JJ and Lee, W-K (2008) Advances in biological structure, function, and physiology using synchrotron X-Ray imaging. Annu Rev Physiol 70, 119–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Winter, DMD, Schneijdenberg, C, Lebbink, M, Lich, B, Verkleij, A, Drury, M and Humbel, B (2009) Tomography of insulating biological and geological materials using focused ion beam (FIB) sectioning and low-kV BSE imaging. J Microsc 233, 1365–2818.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yushkevich, PA, Piven, J, Hazlett, HC, Smith, RG, Ho, S, Gee, JC and Geri, G (2006) User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: Significantly improved efficiency and reliability. Neuroimage 31, 1116–1128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed