Have you tried following any of those so-called "references"? They're all hallucinated.
Eg the first one:
Kareklas K, Nettle D, Smulders TV. Water-induced finger wrinkles improve handling of wet objects. Biol Lett. 2013;9(2):20120999. PMID 23303785
Links to:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23303785/
If you follow that link you get to:
Polioudakis D, Bhinge AA, Killion PJ, Lee BK, Abell NS, Iyer VR. A Myc-microRNA network promotes exit from quiescence by suppressing the interferon response and cell-cycle arrest genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013 Feb 1;41(4):2239-54. doi: 10.1093/nar/gks1452. Epub 2013 Jan 8. PMID: 23303785; PMCID: PMC3575845.
The citation the LLM was failing to hallucinate properly is:
Kareklas K, Nettle D, Smulders TV. Water-induced finger wrinkles improve handling of wet objects. Biol Lett. 2013 Jan 8;9(2):20120999. doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2012.0999. PMID: 23302867; PMCID: PMC3639753.
Absolutely everything a LLM outputs has subtle errors. That's how the technology works, it is essential for it to approximate data so it can merge contexts and output text that "looks about right".
However that's also what makes them unreliable and useless for anything that matters. Verification takes as much or more work than doing the entirety of the work without the LLM.