Back

Nanomechanics of Mandible Wear in Insects

Deegala, D. I.; Labonte, D.; Pattrick, J. G.

2026-06-17 bioengineering
10.64898/2026.06.12.731969 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Many animals rely on specialised mouthparts to process food. Because this is a mechanically demanding task, mouthparts often wear, with potentially serious consequences for feeding performance and thus fitness. The biomechanics of wear are therefore of clear biological relevance, but remain poorly understood, especially in insects, where conventional engineering wear tests are hard to implement. Here, we present a nanomechanical characterisation of the mandibular epicuticle of three insect species: two leaf-cutting specialists, one with and one without transition-metal inclusions, and an omnivore. Contrary to predictions from simple engineering wear theory, wear resistance was neither directly proportional to indentation hardness nor inversely proportional to wear load. We suggest that this discrepancy arises in part from the high hardness-to-modulus ratio of mandibular epicuticle, which renders indentation hardness a poor proxy for resistance to plastic deformation. A simple elasto-plastic wear model qualitatively captures the main discrepancies between experiment and theory, and points to a revised set of wear proxies that may allow at least a qualitative ranking of biological materials via iso-performance lines on Ashby plots. Yet, as with most wear models, the wear coefficient remains unpredictable, a limitation strikingly illustrated by the increase in epicuticular wear resistance upon hydration despite a decrease in both hardness and modulus. Together, these observations suggest that purely plastic wear models may often be inadequate for biological materials with a high hardness-to-modulus ratio, and that even elasto-plastic models require careful validation against experimental wear assays. Graphical Abstract O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=78 SRC="FIGDIR/small/731969v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (21K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@13e958org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@13ca5fdorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@b585adorg.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@15b3be3_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Acta Biomaterialia
92 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
57.3%
50% of probability mass above
2
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
235 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
7.5%
3
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 16%
3.3%
4
Nature Materials
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
5
Journal of the Mechanical Behavior of Biomedical Materials
24 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
2.9%
6
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
7
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
393 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
8
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 58%
1.5%
9
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 21%
1.5%
10
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 50%
1.5%
11
Journal of Experimental Biology
259 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
12
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 56%
1.2%
13
Advanced Science
286 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.2%
14
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.0%
15
Soft Matter
60 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.0%
16
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
72 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
17
The Journal of Experimental Biology
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.9%
18
Biomaterials
84 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
19
Biomaterials Advances
22 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
20
Journal of Phycology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.6%
21
Communications Biology
993 papers in training set
Top 33%
0.6%
22
Biophysical Reports
37 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%
23
Physical Review E
112 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%