Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32323027›Full record

ReviewAnimal cognition2020

Multimodal interactions in insect navigation.

Cornelia Buehlmann, Michael Mangan, Paul Graham

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal cognition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing 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

50 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Phobic responses of bull ants (Myrmecia midas) to odours introduced on their foraging route.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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.

Cornelia BuehlmannSchool of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK. cornelia.buehlmann@gmail.com.
Michael ManganDepartment of Computer Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Paul GrahamSchool of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, UK.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R005036/1Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council EP/P006094/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals travelling through the world receive input from multiple sensory modalities that could be important for the guidance of their journeys. Given the availability of a rich array of cues, from idiothetic information to input from sky compasses and visual information through to olfactory and other cues (e.g. gustatory, magnetic, anemotactic or thermal) it is no surprise to see multimodality in most aspects of navigation. In this review, we present the current knowledge of multimodal cue use during orientation and navigation in insects. Multimodal cue use is adapted to a species' sensory ecology and shapes navigation behaviour both during the learning of environmental cues and when performing complex foraging journeys. The simultaneous use of multiple cues is beneficial because it provides redundant navigational information, and in general, multimodality increases robustness, accuracy and overall foraging success. We use examples from sensorimotor behaviours in mosquitoes and flies as well as from large scale navigation in ants, bees and insects that migrate seasonally over large distances, asking at each stage how multiple cues are combined behaviourally and what insects gain from using different modalities.

Indexed as

AntsHoming BehaviorAnimalsBeesCuesLearningOrientationAntsCue integrationInsectsMultimodal navigationOlfactionVision

Identifiers

PMID32323027
PMCPMC7700066

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.