The prefix nano-
is a unit of measurement that denotes one billionth; it is used to talk about
very small things. If you were a billionaire, one dollar would represent your
nano-wealth. If we go with the more traditional Wiki definition,
a nanometer is one billionth of a meter, or the amount your fingernail grows in
one second. Bottom line is nano- is small, very small. So much smaller than
today’s subject, insect eyes, which we think of as being pretty small.
Different insect groups (beetles, flies,
cicadas, etc.) have different eye shapes that cover varying degrees of the
insect head. This variation often reflects what is adaptive for a particular
insect group; for instance, the eyes of dragonflies cover nearly 270º of their
head, while those of june beetles cover less surface area.
Left: head of a dragonfly (Image credit: James Douch). Right head of a june beetle (Image credit) |
A dragonfly relies on their compound eyes to
find and catch prey while flying, while the june beetle, a vegetarian, has a
simpler task of locating a stationary deciduous tree for dinner. From an evolutionary
perspective, the diversity of eye shapes across insect groups is not very
difficult to modify because insects have compound eyes; meaning that the
structure we recognize as an eye is actually comprised of many repeated units
called ommatidia. Thus, to change the size of the eye evolution acts on the
number of ommatidia, rather than on the size of a single organ.
A detailed illustration of a single ommatidium from Snodgrass (1935). |
For details
regarding the structure of the ommatidia I defer to the father of insect
morphology, Robert Evans Snodgrass,
and his Principles of Insect Morphology published in 1935. An interesting man with an inspiring career that would be
worthy of revisiting in a later blog post.
R. E. Snodgrass (Image credit) |
The outer layer of each ommatidium
(singular) has a corneal lens, which is hypothesized to have self-cleaning,
anti-fogging, and anti-reflective properties1. Lucrative properties
for humans trying to keep fog from freezing on power lines, or prevent condensation
from accumulating on scuba diving and skiing masks. In order to put insect eye
structure to work for us we first need to determine what the corneal lens
structure looks like in insects, and then we may want to know how it has
evolved along the insect phylogeny. The framework necessary for
these investigations is an understanding of the anatomy of insect eyes, which we
have thanks to Snodgrass and other curious-minded insect anatomists. And then
we need a phylogeny, or historical perspective of insect relationships, to
understand how these structures change through time.
In 2014, Sun and colleagues published a paper in the
journal Small (not because the journal is
small or publishes small science, but because it publishes science focused at
the nano- and microscales) describing the development of an anti-fogging
polymer inspired by the nanostructures on the corneal lens of a green bottle fly (Lucilia sericata, described by Meigen in
1826 - although there appears to be some conflict regarding whether this fly
should be in the genus Lucilia or the
genus Phaenicia. A fascinating story
I’m sure but we will let that one go for now.). You have probably seen a green
bottle fly, they look like house flies but are larger and metallic green. They
coalesce around poop; horse poop, dog poop, etc., which is one of the reasons
scientists chose this fly. They wanted to know how the eye remained pristine in
“…dusty, miry, and moist environments” (p. 3001). The scientists put their
study subjects in front of a fog machine and found that the eye was
superhydrophobic and stayed dry while the rest of the body was covered in water
droplets.
Figure 1 from Sun et al. (2014). Figure caption: "Microstructures of the fly compound eye and bio-inspired nanostructures. (a) optical image of a green bottle fly, Lucilia sericata, in a fogging test chamber showing the superhydrophobic and clean surface of the compound eyes, even with drops nucleated in the surrounding hairs, (b) schematic illustration of the anatomic structure of the fly compound eye, (c) low magnification SEM image of one fly compound eye, (d) high magnification SEM image of the compound eye showing the close packed ommatidium lens surface, (e) bubble-like protuberances with diameters of ∼100 nm on the surface of the ommatidium, (f) microstructure of the fly-eye bio-inspired ZnO nanostructures consisting of ommatidium-lens-like structures, and (g) a cross-sectional view of the bio-inspired nanostructures, showing similar structures to the anatomic structure of natural fly eyes." |
With this information in hand, Sun and
colleagues used trial and error to establish a protocol to synthesize a polymer
resembling the nanostructure of the fly-eye corneal lens. And, results from
subsequent experimental tests using treated and untreated surfaces in a foggy
room were very clear, the polymer was a success.
Figure 4d from Sun et al. (2014). Figure caption: "Dynamic anti-fogging properties of the bio-inspired nanostructures….. (d) Fogging of the samples placed at a tilting angle of 10o, clearly showing the fog sliding off of the bio-inspired nanostructured coating, but strongly sticking onto the bare glass surface." |
But the question remains, what do these
nanostructures look like in other insects? Does the corneal lens surface of
cockroaches look the same as the green bottle fly? Based on some work done in
the 1970’s, using the best technology at that time, Bernhard and colleagues2
revealed significant variation of corneal lens structures in different insect
groups. A recent follow-up analysis using newer technology supported the
original finding and uncovered a shocking diversity of nanostructures.
Figure 4 from Blagodatski et al. (2015). Figure caption: "Transformations of corneal nanopatterns. The morphogramme depicts the likely interconversions among the nanostructural patterns found in the insect class rather than phylogenetic relationships of the patterns. Primordial dimpled nanopatterns (1, here from a Forficula earwig) can transform into various maze-type nanostructures (2–4; 2 from a Pyrrhocoris firebug, 3 from a Tabanidae fly, and 4 from the butterfly Protographium asius). The latter can further transform into disordered nipples (6, here from the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster), which can further become orderly packed (7, here from a Pterophoridae moth). Alternatively, parallel ridges (5, here from a Tipulidae fly) can evolve either from mazes or nipples. The figure is made of reconstructed 3D AFM images fused, for the sake of visualization not in exact scale, using MATLAB." |
Using a technique called atomic force
microscopy, Blagodatski and colleagues (2015) documented how
nanostructure diversity changes through time. So now, not only are we
interested in how fly-eyes inspire anti-fogging polymer treatments, we are
thinking about the evolution of the corneal lens and what it mean for insects
carrying out their lives in miry environments. From the perspective of the
insects, what I find interesting is that closely related groups do not
necessarily have similar nanostructures. This is unusual because we typically
think of close relatives resembling each other more than they resemble distant
relatives – me and my dad look more alike than me and my friend’s dad,
hopefully. Scientists often hypothesize that such a pattern is indicative of
adaptation, rather than just inheriting what your ancestors had. It is too
early to tell whether this is the case in insects. But the images are
beautiful.
No comments:
Post a Comment