Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20461131›Full record

ArticleChemoecology2010

Towards plant-odor-related olfactory neuroethology in Drosophila.

Bill S Hansson, Markus Knaden, Silke Sachse, Marcus C Stensmyr, Dieter Wicher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chemoecology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Differential processing of a chemosensory cue across life stages sharing the same valence state inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Evolution of herbivory in Drosophilidae linked to loss of behaviors, antennal responses, odorant receptors, and ancestral diet.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Bill S HanssonDepartment of Evolutionary Neuroethology, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, Hans Knoell Strasse 8, 07745 Jena, Germany.
Markus Knaden
Silke Sachse
Marcus C Stensmyr
Dieter Wicher

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drosophila melanogaster is today one of the three foremost models in olfactory research, paralleled only by the mouse and the nematode. In the last years, immense progress has been achieved by combining neurogenetic tools with neurophysiology, anatomy, chemistry, and behavioral assays. One of the most important tasks for a fruit fly is to find a substrate for eating and laying eggs. To perform this task the fly is dependent on olfactory cues emitted by suitable substrates as e.g. decaying fruit. In addition, in this area, considerable progress has been made during the last years, and more and more natural and behaviorally active ligands have been identified. The future challenge is to tie the progress in different fields together to give us a better understanding of how a fly really behaves. Not in a test tube, but in nature. Here, we review our present state of knowledge regarding Drosophila plant-odor-related olfactory neuroethology to provide a basis for new progress.

Identifiers

PMID20461131
PMCPMC2864897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.