Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24681694›Full record

ArticleNature methods2014

Quantifying Drosophila food intake: comparative analysis of current methodology.

Sonali A Deshpande, Gil B Carvalho, Ariadna Amador, Angela M Phillips, Sany Hoxha, Keith J Lizotte, William W Ja

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nature methods, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 127 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
127citing papers in PubMed
22.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

127 citing papers in PubMed, 237 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Progressive behavioral and cognitive decline inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Ovary-Derived Signals Align Protein Appetite with Oogenesis.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Energy Deficit Is a Key Driver of Sleep Homeostasis.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025
    Article
  17. Systemic Effects of Photoactivated 5,10,15,20-tetrakis(Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2024
    Article
  18. Journal of traditional and complementary medicine · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

67 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Sonali A Deshpande1] Department of Metabolism and Aging, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA. [2].
Gil B Carvalho1] Department of Metabolism and Aging, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA. [2] [3].
Ariadna Amador1] Department of Metabolism and Aging, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA. [2] Scripps Graduate Program, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA. [3].
Angela M Phillips1] Department of Metabolism and Aging, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA. [2].
Sany Hoxha1] Department of Metabolism and Aging, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA. [2] Scripps Graduate Program, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA.ORCID 0000000328070812
Keith J LizotteDepartment of Metabolism and Aging, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA.
William W Ja1] Department of Metabolism and Aging, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA. [2] Scripps Graduate Program, The Scripps Research Institute, Jupiter, Florida, USA.
Scripps Research Institute · USUniversity of Southern California · US

Funding

Role of bacteria in development and lifespan of Drosophila melanogasterR00AG030493 · NIA · SCRIPPS RESEARCH INSTITUTE, THE · PI JA, WILLIAM W · 2010 to 2012
$728k
Drosophila feeding behavior: New tools for the genetic dissection of prandiologyR21DK092735 · NIDDK · SCRIPPS FLORIDA · PI JA, WILLIAM W · 2011 to 2012
$545k
NIA NIH HHS R00 AG030493NIA NIH HHS R00AG030493NIDDK NIH HHS R21 DK092735NIDDK NIH HHS R21DK092735
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Food intake is a fundamental parameter in animal studies. Despite the prevalent use of Drosophila in laboratory research, precise measurements of food intake remain challenging in this model organism. Here, we compare several common Drosophila feeding assays: the capillary feeder (CAFE), food labeling with a radioactive tracer or colorimetric dye and observations of proboscis extension (PE). We show that the CAFE and radioisotope labeling provide the most consistent results, have the highest sensitivity and can resolve differences in feeding that dye labeling and PE fail to distinguish. We conclude that performing the radiolabeling and CAFE assays in parallel is currently the best approach for quantifying Drosophila food intake. Understanding the strengths and limitations of methods for measuring food intake will greatly advance Drosophila studies of nutrition, behavior and disease.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalEatingFeeding BehaviorAnimalsColorimetryDrosophila melanogasterFemaleGenetics, BehavioralMaleRadioactive TracersReproducibility of ResultsResearch DesignSex FactorsRadioactive Tracers

Identifiers

PMID24681694
PMCPMC4008671
OpenAlexW2055646225

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.