Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25762650›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2015

Controlling roll perturbations in fruit flies.

Tsevi Beatus, John M Guckenheimer, Itai Cohen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. How tp1, an indirect wing steering muscle, stabilizesbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The self-oscillation paradox in the flight motor ofJournal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Sensory gaze stabilization in echolocating bats.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2019
    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

3 authors.

Tsevi BeatusDepartment of Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA tsevi.beatus@cornell.edu.
John M GuckenheimerDepartment of Mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
Itai CohenDepartment of Physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Owing to aerodynamic instabilities, stable flapping flight requires ever-present fast corrective actions. Here, we investigate how flies control perturbations along their body roll angle, which is unstable and their most sensitive degree of freedom. We glue a magnet to each fly and apply a short magnetic pulse that rolls it in mid-air. Fast video shows flies correct perturbations up to 100° within 30 ± 7 ms by applying a stroke-amplitude asymmetry that is well described by a linear proportional-integral controller. For more aggressive perturbations, we show evidence for nonlinear and hierarchical control mechanisms. Flies respond to roll perturbations within 5 ms, making this correction reflex one of the fastest in the animal kingdom.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaDrosophila melanogasterFlight, AnimalTime FactorsVideo RecordingWings, Animalbiolocomotionflight controlfruit flyinsect flight

Identifiers

PMID25762650
PMCPMC4387536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.