Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

A reversible wet/dry adhesive inspired by mussels and geckos


The adhesive strategy of the gecko relies on foot pads composed of specialized keratinous foot-hairs called setae, which are subdivided into terminal spatulae of approximately 200 nm (ref. 1). Contact between the gecko foot and an opposing surface generates adhesive forces that are sufficient to allow the gecko to cling onto vertical and even inverted surfaces. Although strong, the adhesion is temporary, permitting rapid detachment and reattachment of the gecko foot during locomotion. Researchers have attempted to capture these properties of gecko adhesive in synthetic mimics with nanoscale surface features reminiscent of setae2,3,4,5,6,7; however, maintenance of adhesive performance over many cycles has been elusive2,8, and gecko adhesion is greatly diminished upon full immersion in water9,10. Here we report a hybrid biologically inspired adhesive consisting of an array of nanofabricated polymer pillars coated with a thin layer of a synthetic polymer that mimics the wet adhesive proteins found in mussel holdfasts. Wet adhesion of the nanostructured polymer pillar arrays increased nearly 15-fold when coated with mussel-mimetic polymer. The system maintains its adhesive performance for over a thousand contact cycles in both dry and wet environments. This hybrid adhesive, which combines the salient design elements of both gecko and mussel adhesives, should be useful for reversible attachment to a variety of surfaces in any environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type



Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Rational design and fabrication of wet/dry hybrid nanoadhesive.
Figure 2: Fabricated gecko and geckel adhesives.
Figure 3: AFM method for adhesion measurement and imaging of contact area at the single pillar level.
Figure 4: Force–distance curves and adhesion strength of geckel adhesive.


  1. Ruibal, R. & Ernst, V. The structure of the digital setae of lizards. J. Morphol. 117, 271–293 (1965)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Geim, A. K. et al. Microfabricated adhesive mimicking gecko foot-hair. Nature Mater. 2, 461–463 (2003)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Northen, M. T. & Turner, K. L. A batch fabricated biomimetic dry adhesive. Nanotechnology 16, 1159–1166 (2005)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sitti, M. & Fearing, R. Synthetic gecko foot-hair micro/nano-structures as dry adhesives. J. Adhes. Sci. Technol. 17, 1055–1073 (2003)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Yurdumakan, B., Raravikar, N. R., Ajayan, P. M. & Dhinojwala, A. Synthetic gecko foot-hairs from multiwalled carbon nanotubes. Chem. Commun. 30, 3799–3801 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Peressadko, A. & Gorb, S. N. When less is more: Experimental evidence for tenacity enhancement by division of contact area. J. Adhesion 80, 1–5 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Crosby, A. J., Hageman, M. & Duncan, A. Controlling polymer adhesion with “Pancakes”. Langmuir 21, 11738–11743 (2005)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Northen, M. T. & Turner, K. L. Meso-scale adhesion testing of integrated micro- and nano-scale structures. Sensors Actuators A 130–131, 583–587 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Huber, G. et al. Evidence for capillary contributions to gecko adhesion from single spatula nanomechanical measurements. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 16293–16296 (2005)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sun, W., Neuzil, P., Kustandi, T. S., Oh, S. & Samper, V. D. The nature of the gecko lizard adhesive force. Biophys. J. 89, L14–L16 (2005)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Autumn, K. et al. Evidence for van der Waals adhesion in gecko setae. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 99, 12252–12256 (2002)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Autumn, K. et al. Adhesive force of a single gecko foot-hair. Nature 405, 681–685 (2000)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Huber, G., Gorb, S. N., Spolenak, R. & Arzt, E. Resolving the nanoscale adhesion of individual gecko spatulae by atomic force microscopy. Biol. Lett. 1, 2–4 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Arzt, E., Gorb, S. & Spolenak, R. From micro to nano contacts in biological attachment devices. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 10603–10606 (2003)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Arzt, E. Biological and artificial attachment devices: Lessons for materials scientists from flies and geckos. Mater. Sci. Engin. C 26, 1245–1250 (2006)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Spolenak, R., Gorb, S. & Arzt, E. Adhesion design maps for bio-inspired attachment systems. Acta Biomater. 1, 5–13 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Waite, J. H. Nature's underwater adhesive specialist. Chemtech 17, 692–697 (1987)

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Waite, J. H. Adhesion a la moule. Integr. Comp. Biol. 42, 1172–1180 (2002)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Waite, J. H. & Tanzer, M. L. Polyphenolic substance of Mytilus edulis: novel adhesive containing L-dopa and hydroxyproline. Science 212, 1038–1040 (1981)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Papov, V. V., Diamond, T. V., Biemann, K. & Waite, J. H. Hydroxyarginine-containing polyphenolic proteins in the adhesive plaques of the marine mussel Mytilus edulis. J. Biol. Chem. 270, 20183–20192 (1995)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Waite, J. H. & Qin, X. X. Polyphenolic phosphoprotein from the adhesive pads of the common mussel. Biochemistry 40, 2887–2893 (2001)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Yu, M. & Deming, T. J. Synthetic polypeptide mimics of marine adhesives. Macromolecules 31, 4739–4745 (1998)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Frank, B. P. & Belfort, G. Adhesion of Mytilus edulis foot protein 1 on silica: ionic effects on biofouling. Biotechnol. Prog. 18, 580–586 (2002)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hwang, D. S., Yoo, H. J., Jun, J. H., Moon, W. K. & Cha, H. J. Expression of functional recombinant mussel adhesive protein Mgfp-5 in Escherichia coli. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 70, 3352–3359 (2004)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lee, B. et al. Rapid gel formation and adhesion in photocurable and biodegradable block copolymers with high DOPA content. Macromolecules 39, 1740–1748 (2006)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee, H., Scherer, N. F. & Messersmith, P. B. Single molecule mechanics of mussel adhesion. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 12999–13003 (2006)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Whitesides, G. M. The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature 442, 368–373 (2006)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Waite, J. H., Andersen, N. H., Jewhurst, S. & Sun, C. Mussel adhesion: finding the tricks worth mimicking. J. Adhesion 81, 1–21 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dalsin, D. L., Hu, B.-H., Lee, B. P. & Messersmith, P. B. Mussel adhesive protein mimetic polymers for the preparation of nonfouling surfaces. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125, 4253–4258 (2003)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Hutter, J. L. & Bechhoefer, J. Calibration of atomic-force microscope tips. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 64, 1868–1873 (1993)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references


We are grateful to the NIH and NASA for providing funding for this work. We thank J. Jureller and W. Russin for advice on optical imaging, B. Meyer for electron-beam lithography discussions, and V. Dravid and K. Shull for critical reading of the manuscript. Portions of this work used the NUANCE (EPIC, KECK-II and NIFTI) and biological imaging facilities at Northwestern University, the Nanobio facility at the University of Chicago, and the National Magnetic Resonance Facility at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Author Contributions P.B.M. planned the project, designed experiments, analysed data and wrote the manuscript. H.L. designed and performed experiments, analysed data and wrote the manuscript. B.P.L. designed and synthesized the polymer and wrote the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Phillip B. Messersmith.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The corresponding author (P.B.M.) is a stockholder of Nerites Corporation, which supplied one of the polymers used in this study.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Figures 1-3 and Legends, Supplementary Methods; and Supplementary Video 1 Legend. (PDF 514 kb)

Supplementary Video 1

This file contains Supplementary Video 1. The Supplementary Video file contains six nanopillars of geckel contacting with a tipless AFM cantilever. (MOV 433 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lee, H., Lee, B. & Messersmith, P. A reversible wet/dry adhesive inspired by mussels and geckos. Nature 448, 338–341 (2007).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing