Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31889001›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2020

Behavioral evidence for geomagnetic imprinting and transgenerational inheritance in fruit flies.

In-Taek Oh, Hye-Jin Kwon, Soo-Chan Kim, Hyung-Jun Kim, Kenneth J Lohmann, Kwon-Seok Chae

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Insect magnetoreception: a Cry for mechanistic insights.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2023
    Review
  5. Probing Transcriptional Crosstalk betweenInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  6. Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Effects of antibiotics on theFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Magnetic maps in animal navigation.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2022
    Review
  11. 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

6 authors.

In-Taek OhDepartment of Biology Education, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea.
Hye-Jin KwonDepartment of Nanoscience & Nanotechnology, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea.
Soo-Chan KimDepartment of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Hankyong National University, Anseong 17579, Republic of Korea.
Hyung-Jun KimDementia Research Group, Korea Brain Research Institute (KBRI), Daegu 41062, Republic of Korea.
Kenneth J LohmannDepartment of Biology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599.
Kwon-Seok ChaeDepartment of Biology Education, Kyungpook National University, Daegu 41566, Republic of Korea; kschae@knu.ac.kr.ORCID 0000-0001-5051-0699

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Certain long-distance migratory animals, such as salmon and sea turtles, are thought to imprint on the magnetic field of their natal area and to use this information to help them return as adults. Despite a growing body of indirect support for such imprinting, direct experimental evidence thereof remains elusive. Here, using the fruit fly as a magnetoreceptive model organism, we demonstrate that exposure to a specific geographic magnetic field during a critical period of early development affected responses to a matching magnetic field gradient later in life. Specifically, hungry flies that had imprinted on a specific magnetic field from 1 of 3 widely separated geographic locations responded to the imprinted field, but not other magnetic fields, by moving downward, a geotactic behavior associated with foraging. This same behavior occurred spontaneously in the progeny of the next generation: female progeny moved downward in response to the field on which their parents had imprinted, whereas male progeny did so only in the presence of these females. These results represent experimental evidence that organisms can learn and remember a magnetic field to which they were exposed during a critical period of development. Although the function of the behavior is not known, one possibility is that imprinting on the magnetic field of a natal area assists flies and their offspring in recognizing locations likely to be favorable for foraging and reproduction.

Indexed as

Magnetic FieldsAnimal MigrationAnimalsDrosophilaFemaleHoming BehaviorImprinting, PsychologicalMaleReproductionfruit flygeomagnetic fieldmagnetic imprintingmagnetoreceptiontransgenerational inheritance

Identifiers

PMID31889001
PMCPMC6969531

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.