Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34127729›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Light from a firefly at temperatures considerably higher and lower than normal.

Mana Mohan Rabha, Upamanyu Sharma, Anurup Gohain Barua

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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.

Mana Mohan RabhaDepartment of Physics, Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya Adarsha Mahavidyalaya, Behali, 784184, India.
Upamanyu SharmaDepartment of Physics, Gauhati University, Guwahati, 781014, India.
Anurup Gohain BaruaDepartment of Physics, Gauhati University, Guwahati, 781014, India. agohainbarua@yahoo.com.
Gauhati University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bioluminescence emissions from a few species of fireflies have been studied at different temperatures. Variations in the flash-duration have been observed and interesting conclusions drawn in those studies. Here we investigate steady-state and pulsed emissions from male specimens of the Indian species Sclerotia substriata at temperatures considerably higher and lower than the ones at which they normally flash. When the temperature is raised to 34 °C, the peak wavelength gets red-shifted and the emitted pulses become the narrowest which broaden considerably thereafter for small increases in temperature; this probably indicates denaturation of the enzyme luciferase catalyzing the light-producing reaction. When the temperature is decreased to the region of 10.5-9 °C, the peak gets blue-shifted and the flash-duration increased abnormally with large fluctuation; this possibly implies cold denaturation of the luciferase. We conclude that the first or hot effect is very likely to be the reason of the species being dark-active on hot days, and the second or cold one is the probable reason for its disappearance at the onset of the winter. Our study makes the inference that these two happenings determine the temperature-tolerance, which plays a major role in the selection of the habitat for the firefly.

Indexed as

LuminescenceAnimalsCold TemperatureFirefliesHot TemperatureHydrogen-Ion ConcentrationLuciferases, FireflyLuminescent MeasurementsMaleProtein DenaturationSeasonsThermotoleranceTime FactorsLuciferases, Firefly

Identifiers

PMID34127729
PMCPMC8203691
OpenAlexW3166637728

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.