ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2013
Exploring the mammalian sensory space: co-operations and trade-offs among senses.
Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multiomics analysis provides insights into musk secretion in muskrat and musk deer.GigaScience · 2025Article
- Which cues are sexy? The evolution of mate preference in sympatric species reveals the contrasted effect of adaptation and reproductive interference.Evolution letters · 2024Article
- A towering genome: Experimentally validated adaptations to high blood pressure and extreme stature in the giraffe.Science advances · 2021Article
- To see or not to see: molecular evolution of the rhodopsin visual pigment in neotropical electric fishes.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019Article
- Early Triassic marine reptile representing the oldest record of unusually small eyes in reptiles indicating non-visual prey detection.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Olfactory sensitivity for mold-associated odorants in CD-1 mice and spider monkeys.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2018Article
- Article
- Poor human olfaction is a 19th-century myth.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evolution of a particular sensory organ is often discussed with no consideration of the roles played by other senses. Here, we treat mammalian vision, olfaction and hearing as an interconnected whole, a three-dimensional sensory space, evolving in response to ecological challenges. Until now, there has been no quantitative method for estimating how much a particular animal invests in its different senses. We propose an anatomical measure based on sensory organ sizes. Dimensions of functional importance are defined and measured, and normalized in relation to animal mass. For 119 taxonomically and ecologically diverse species, we can define the position of the species in a three-dimensional sensory space. Thus, we can ask questions related to possible trade-off vs. co-operation among senses. More generally, our method allows morphologists to identify sensory organ combinations that are characteristic of particular ecological niches. After normalization for animal size, we note that arboreal mammals tend to have larger eyes and smaller noses than terrestrial mammals. On the other hand, we observe a strong correlation between eyes and ears, indicating that co-operation between vision and hearing is a general mammalian feature. For some groups of mammals we note a correlation, and possible co-operation between olfaction and whiskers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24043357What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.