Framework structures model selection in biomimetic design, suggesting optimal biological candidates through scoring.
Selecting suitable biological models remains one of the most challenging and least formalised steps in biomimetic design. Existing tools support searching for biological strategies and transferring principles into engineering concepts, but provide limited guidance on which organism to prioritise once multiple plausible candidates are identified. Here we present a phylogeny-informed, data-driven framework that structures model selection as an explicit comparison. The framework computes four module scores per candidate model: data sufficiency, innovativeness, phylogenetic characteristics, and an open-ended contextual module for project-specific constraints. Users assign weights to the modules to reflect resources, timelines, and design requirements, yielding an overall compatible score and a ranked shortlist. We demonstrate the framework in a microplastic-filtration case study using 35 suspension-feeding taxa and three archetypal user scenarios. Rankings reveal a compact set of candidates that remains competitive across scenarios, while a smaller subset shifts in response to changes in priorities, thereby distinguishing robust starting points from context-dependent opportunities. Overall, the framework fills an under-supported gap in current biomimetic workflows by providing a structured decision-support layer for biological model selection.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: