ArticlePloS one2020
Dynamics of odor sampling strategies in mice.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dexterous single sniffs for ethological active olfaction.Science advances · 2026Article
- Breathing Rate as a Marker for Noise-Induced Stress in Guinea Pigs.Brain sciences · 2025Article
- Oscillations in the prefrontal-hippocampal circuit couple to respiration-related oscillations during all phases of a working memory task.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- Article
- Active smelling in the American cockroach.The Journal of experimental biology · 2023Article
- Spatial information from the odour environment in mammalian olfaction.Cell and tissue research · 2021Review
- Stimulus Driven Functional Transformations in the Early Olfactory System.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mammalian olfactory receptor neurons in the nasal cavity are stimulated by odorants carried by the inhaled air and their activation is therefore tied to and driven by the breathing or sniffing frequency. Sniffing frequency can be deliberately modulated to alter how odorants stimulate olfactory receptor neurons, giving the animal control over the frequency of odorant exposure to potentially aid odorant detection and discrimination. We monitored sniffing behaviors and odorant discrimination ability of freely-moving mice while they sampled either decreasing concentrations of target odorants or sampled a fixed target odorant concentration in the presence of a background of increasing odorant concentrations, using a Go-NoGo behavioral paradigm. This allowed us to ask how mice alter their odorant sampling duration and sampling (sniffing) frequency depending on the demands of the task and its difficulty. Mice showed an anticipatory increase in sniffing rate prior to odorant exposure and chose to sample for longer durations when exposed to odorants as compared to the solvent control odorant. Similarly, mice also took more odorant sampling sniffs when exposed to target odorants compared to the solvent control odorant. In general, odorant sampling strategies became more similar the more difficult the task was, e.g. the lower the target odorant concentration or the lower the target odorant contrast relative to the background odorant, suggesting that sniffing patterns are not preset, but are dynamically modulated by the particular task and its difficulty.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.