Table 2 Measured adhesion performance of whole tree frogs (top) and of single limbs/toe pads (bottom; SP unless stated otherwise) on smooth dry substrates
From: Tree frog attachment: mechanisms, challenges, and perspectives
Reference | Species | Adhesion F⊥ | Tenacity σ⊥ | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
[mN] | [mN mm −2] | |||
[6] | O. septentrionalis | 75.5 | 1.2 | PMMA |
[24] | H. cinerea | 39.24 | 1.4 | Teflon |
[40] | various hylids | 2.0–372.0 | 0.4–1.3 | PMMA |
[41] | various hylids | 4.3–180.2 | 0.4–0.7 | PMMA |
[42] | various hylids | 0.5–200.0 | 0.30–1.08 | PMMA |
[71] | L. caerulea | 255.3  ± 73.7 | — | Glass |
[6] | O. septentrionalis | 5.9  ± 2.1–14.9  ± 3.6 | — | SL |
[10] | R. pardalis | — | 1.5 | PE |
[39] | R. dennysi | 1.7–11.3 | 1.1–2.3 | Varying detachment kinematics |
[65] | H. arborea | 127.53 | — | SL, Frontlimb, Metal |
[71] | L. caerulea | — | 1.08  ± 0.24 | Glass |
[97] | L. caerulea | — | 1.74  ± 1.90 | Resin |
— | 1.43  ± 0.60 | PDMS | ||
[101] | L. caerulea | — | 0.04–1.12 | Varying load angle |
[113] | L. caerulea | 13.9–34.0 | — | SL |