Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31412069›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Landing maneuvers of houseflies on vertical and inverted surfaces.

Sujay Balebail, Sathish K Raja, Sanjay P Sane

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Analysis of collision avoidance in honeybee flight.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Peking geckos (Gekko swinhonis) traversing upward steps: the effect of step height on the transition from horizontal to vertical locomotion.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sujay BalebailNational Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bangalore, India.
Sathish K RajaNational Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bangalore, India.
Sanjay P SaneNational Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Bangalore, India.ORCID 0000-0002-8274-1181
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Landing maneuvers of flies are complex behaviors which can be conceptually decomposed into sequences of modular actions, including body-deceleration, leg-extension, and body rotations. These behavioral 'modules' must be coordinated to ensure well-controlled landing. The composite nature of these behaviors induces kinematic variability, making it difficult to identify the central rules that govern landing. Many previous studies have relied on tethered preparations to study landing behaviors, but tethering induces experimental artefacts by forcing some behaviors to operate in open-feedback control loop while others remain closed-loop. On the other hand, it is harder for the experimenter to control the stimuli experienced by freely-flying insects. One approach towards understanding general mechanisms of landing is to determine the common elements of their kinematics on surfaces of different orientations. We conducted a series of experiments in which the houseflies, Musca domestica, were lured to land on vertical (wall landings) or inverted (ceiling landings) substrates, while their flight was recorded with multiple high-speed cameras. We observed that, in both cases, well-controlled landings occurred when the distance at which flies initiated deceleration was proportional to flight velocity component in the direction of substrate. The ratio of substrate distance and velocity at onset of deceleration (tau) was conserved, despite substantial differences in mechanics of vertical vs. ceiling landings. When these conditions were not satisfied, their landing performance was compromised, causing their heads to collide into the substrate. Unlike body-deceleration, leg-extension in flies was independent of substrate distance or approach velocity. Thus, the robust reflexive visual initiation of deceleration is independent of substrate orientation, and combines with a more variable initiation of leg-extension which depends on surface orientation. Together, these combinations of behaviors enable flies to land in a versatile manner on substrates of various orientations.

Indexed as

AnimalsAvoidance LearningBiomechanical PhenomenaDecelerationFlight, AnimalHousefliesMotor ActivityOrientation, Spatial

Identifiers

PMID31412069
PMCPMC6693754
OpenAlexW2968550454

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.