Table 3.
Quantification of radius ratio and radius slope obtained from previous studies
| Origin of Data | Whisker | DBase, μm | DTip, μm | STotal, mm | RBase/RTip | (RBase − RTip)/STotal |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data from Ibrahim and Wright (1975) | ||||||
| We scanned Fig. 6 from Ibrahim and Wright (1975) | β | 180 | 5 | 52 | 36 | 1.68 × 10−3 |
| A1 | 169 | 5 | 44 | 34 | 1.86 × 10−3 | |
| A2 | 122 | 5 | 31 | 24 | 1.89 × 10−3 | |
| A3 | 111 | 5 | 22 | 22 | 2.41 × 10−3 | |
| A4 | 88 | 5 | 14 | 18 | 2.96 × 10−3 | |
| Data from Hartmann et al. (2003) | ||||||
| DBase and STotal are shown in Fig. 6c of Hartmann et al. (2003); DTip was obtained by reexamining the data used in Hartmann et al. (2003) | α | 209 | 4 | 52 | 52 | 1.97 × 10−3 |
| β | 144 | 2 | 54 | 72 | 1.31 × 10−3 | |
| γ | 202 | 8 | 60 | 25 | 1.62 × 10−3 | |
| δ | 171 | 5 | 56 | 34 | 1.48 × 10−3 | |
| A1 | 139 | 3 | 49 | 46 | 1.39 × 10−3 | |
| B1 | 189 | 5 | 49 | 38 | 1.88 × 10−3 | |
| C1 | 220 | 6 | 53 | 37 | 2.02 × 10−3 | |
| D1 | 252 | 4 | 49 | 63 | 2.53 × 10−3 | |
| E1 | 187 | 10 | 48 | 19 | 1.84 × 10−3 | |
| A2 | 133 | 14 | 37 | 10 | 1.61 × 10−3 | |
| B2 | 162 | 47 | 31 | 3 | 1.85 × 10−3 | |
| C2 | 117 | 5 | 30 | 23 | 1.87 × 10−3 | |
| D2 | 180 | 10 | 35 | 18 | 2.43 × 10−3 | |
| E2 | 171 | 11 | 35 | 16 | 2.29 × 10−3 | |
| A3 | 83 | 2 | 23 | 42 | 1.76 × 10−3 | |
| B3 | 212 | 3 | 26 | 71 | 4.02 × 10−3 | |
| C3 | 158 | 8 | 35 | 20 | 2.14 × 10−3 | |
| D3 | 180 | 6 | 27 | 30 | 3.22 × 10−3 | |
| E3 | 191 | 6 | 26 | 32 | 3.56 × 10−3 | |
| A4 | 94 | 4 | 22 | 24 | 2.05 × 10−3 | |
| B4 | 109 | 2 | 25 | 55 | 2.14 × 10−3 | |
| C4 | 137 | 4 | 26 | 34 | 2.56 × 10−3 | |
| D4 | 124 | 4 | 28 | 31 | 2.14 × 10−3 | |
| E4 | 158 | 2 | 17 | 79 | 4.59 × 10−3 | |
| Data from Voges et al. (2012) | ||||||
| Original data were obtained from the authors of Voges et al. (2012) | α | 140 | 2 | 47 | 70 | 1.47 × 10−3 |
| A1 | 131 | 3 | 42 | 44 | 1.52 × 10−3 | |
| A2 | 89 | 1 | 27 | 89 | 1.63 × 10−3 | |
| A3 | 80 | 2 | 20 | 40 | 1.95 × 10−3 | |
| A4 | 63 | 1 | 13 | 63 | 2.38 × 10−3 | |
| β | 153 | 3 | 50 | 51 | 1.50 × 10−3 | |
| B1 | 145 | 3 | 45 | 48 | 1.58 × 10−3 | |
| B2 | 126 | 2 | 33 | 63 | 1.88 × 10−3 | |
| B3 | 95 | 2 | 23 | 48 | 2.02 × 10−3 | |
| B4 | 69 | 3 | 13 | 23 | 2.54 × 10−3 | |
| C1 | 167 | 2 | 44 | 84 | 1.88 × 10−3 | |
| C2 | 143 | 2 | 33 | 72 | 2.14 × 10−3 | |
| C3 | 113 | 1 | 22 | 113 | 2.55 × 10−3 | |
| C4 | 87 | 2 | 13 | 44 | 3.27 × 10−3 | |
| δ | 148 | 1 | 48 | 148 | 1.53 × 10−3 | |
| D1 | 174 | 7 | 45 | 25 | 1.86 × 10−3 | |
| D2 | 156 | 2 | 35 | 78 | 2.20 × 10−3 | |
| D3 | 135 | 2 | 26 | 68 | 2.56 × 10−3 | |
| D4 | 112 | 1 | 18 | 112 | 3.08 × 10−3 | |
| E1 | 187 | 5 | 47 | 37 | 1.94 × 10−3 | |
| E2 | 175 | 6 | 34 | 29 | 2.49 × 10−3 | |
| E3 | 150 | 3 | 26 | 50 | 2.83 × 10−3 | |
| E4 | 115 | 3 | 18 | 38 | 3.11 × 10−3 | |
The tip diameter in Ibrahim and Wright (1975) was not visible at the resolution of the figure, so the mean tip diameter from the present study was used as an approximation for all five whiskers. The base and tip diameter data for Voges et al. (2012) were obtained from the authors as the averages of three measurements. These averages have been rounded to the nearest micrometer. All values of radius ratio are reported to the nearest integer. These values can be rounded to a single significant digit for consistency with the measurement precision of tip diameter.