Issue 7, 2013

Reply to the ‘Comment on “Innovation through imitation: Biomimetic, bioinspired and biokleptic research”’ by M. Drack and I. C. Gebeshuber, Soft Matter, 2013, 9, DOI: 10.1039/c2sm26722e

Abstract

A response to the comments raised by Drack et al. in their reply to the discussion of biomimicry and related fields set out in our opinions paper Rawlings et al. Here we appreciate the common views we share and welcome the clarity this gives, and we discuss and question some of their criticisms of the original piece and clarify our opinion in this area.

Graphical abstract: Reply to the ‘Comment on “Innovation through imitation: Biomimetic, bioinspired and biokleptic research”’ by M. Drack and I. C. Gebeshuber, Soft Matter, 2013, 9, DOI: 10.1039/c2sm26722e

Article information

Article type
Comment
Submitted
02 Oct 2012
Accepted
28 Nov 2012
First published
03 Jan 2013

Soft Matter, 2013,9, 2341-2342

Reply to the ‘Comment on “Innovation through imitation: Biomimetic, bioinspired and biokleptic research”’ by M. Drack and I. C. Gebeshuber, Soft Matter, 2013, 9, DOI: 10.1039/c2sm26722e

A. E. Rawlings, J. P. Bramble and S. S. Staniland, Soft Matter, 2013, 9, 2341 DOI: 10.1039/C2SM27271G

To request permission to reproduce material from this article, please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page.

If you are an author contributing to an RSC publication, you do not need to request permission provided correct acknowledgement is given.

If you are the author of this article, you do not need to request permission to reproduce figures and diagrams provided correct acknowledgement is given. If you want to reproduce the whole article in a third-party publication (excluding your thesis/dissertation for which permission is not required) please go to the Copyright Clearance Center request page.

Read more about how to correctly acknowledge RSC content.

Social activity

Spotlight

Advertisements