Understanding the Venus flytrap through mathematical modelling

How water flow, geometry, and material properties drive plant movements

Plants are dynamic. They adjust their shape for feeding, defence, and reproduction. Such plant movements are critical for their survival. We present selected examples covering a range of movements from single cell to tissue level and over a range of time scales. We focus on reversible turgor-driven shape changes. Recent insights into the mechanisms of stomata, bladderwort, the waterwheel, and the Venus flytrap are presented. The underlying physical principles (turgor, osmosis, membrane permeability, wall stress, snap buckling, and elastic instability) are highlighted, and advances in our understanding of these processes are summarized.

How the carnivorous waterwheel plant (Aldrovanda vesiculosa) snaps

The fast motion of the snap-traps of the terrestrial Venus flytrap (Dionaea muscipula) have been intensively studied, in contrast to the tenfold faster underwater snap-traps of its phylogenetic sister, the waterwheel plant (Aldrovanda vesiculosa). Based on biomechanical and functional-morphological analyses and on a reverse biomimetic approach via mechanical modelling and computer simulations, we identify a combination of hydraulic turgor change and the release of prestress stored in the trap as essential for actuation. Our study is the first to identify and analyse in detail the motion principle of Aldrovanda, which not only leads to a deepened understanding of fast plant movements in general, but also contributes to the question of how snap-traps may have evolved and also allows for the development of novel biomimetic compliant mechanisms.

Comparative Prey Spectra Analyses on the Endangered Aquatic Carnivorous Waterwheel Plant (Aldrovanda vesiculosa, Droseraceae) at Several Naturalized Microsites in the Czech Republic and Germany

The critically endangered carnivorous waterwheel plant (Aldrovanda vesiculosa, Droseraceae) possesses underwater snap traps for capturing small aquatic animals, but knowledge on the exact prey species is limited. Such information would be essential for continuing ecological research, drawing conclusions regarding trapping efficiency and trap evolution, and eventually, for conservation. Therefore, we performed comparative trap size measurements and snapshot prey analyses at seven Czech and one German naturalized microsites on plants originating from at least two different populations. One Czech site was sampled twice during 2017. We recorded seven main prey taxonomic groups, that is, Cladocera, Copepoda, Ostracoda, Ephemeroptera, Nematocera, Hydrachnidia, and Pulmonata. In total, we recorded 43 different prey taxa in 445 prey-filled traps, containing in sum 461 prey items. With one exception, prey spectra did not correlate with site conditions (e.g. water depth) or trap size. Our data indicate that A. vesiculosa shows no prey specificity but catches opportunistically, independent of prey species, prey mobility mode (swimming or substrate-bound), and speed of movement. Even in cases where the prey size exceeded trap size, successful capture was accomplished by clamping the animal between the traps' lobes. As we found a wide prey range that was attracted, it appears unlikely that the capture is enhanced by specialized chemical- or mimicry-based attraction mechanisms. However, for animals seeking shelter, a place to rest, or a substrate to graze on, A. vesiculosa may indirectly attract prey organisms in the vicinity, whereas other prey capture events (like that of comparably large notonectids) may also be purely coincidental.