Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29214474›Full record

ArticleOecologia2018

Insufficient evidence for habituation in Mimosa pudica. Response to Gagliano et al. (2014).

Robert Biegler

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oecologia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. 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

1 author.

Robert BieglerDepartment of Psychology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. Robert.Biegler@ntnu.no.ORCID 0000-0003-4679-4224

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gagliano et al. (Oecologia 175(1):63-72, 2014) reported that Mimosa pudica habituates to repeated stimulation, as shown by a reduction in response, dishabituation, and stimulus specificity. I argue that Gagliano et al.'s data show an absence of dishabituation, that their experimental design needs an additional condition to test whether there is stimulus specificity, and that most of their data can be explained by motor fatigue. Some data are not easily explained by fatigue, and I suggest a further analysis that may clarify the issue. The status of habituation in Mimosa remains uncertain.

Indexed as

MimosaHabituationMinimal intelligenceNon-associative learningPlant behaviour

Identifiers

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.