ReviewNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2021
Using your nose to find your way: Ethological comparisons between human and non-human species.
Review in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Olfactory spatial memory: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Perception and neural representation of intermittent odor stimuli in mice.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Olfactory assessment in treatment and survivor groups of pediatric solid malignancies.Discover oncology · 2026Article
- Odour learning concentration influences concentration range of conditioned response in newborn rabbits.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Olfactory bulb tracks breathing rhythms and place in freely behaving mice.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- An experimental framework for conjoint measures of olfaction, navigation, and motion as pre-clinical biomarkers of Alzheimer's disease.Journal of Alzheimer's disease reports · 2024Review
- Recruitment of grid-like responses in human entorhinal and piriform cortices by odor landmark-based navigation.Current biology : CB · 2023Article
- Experience-dependent evolution of odor mixture representations in piriform cortex.PLoS biology · 2023Article
- How the evolution of air breathing shaped hippocampal function.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022Article
- On the state-dependent nature of odor perception.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Olfaction is arguably the least valued among our sensory systems, and its significance for human behavior is often neglected. Spatial navigation represents no exception to the rule: humans are often characterized as purely visual navigators, a view that undermines the contribution of olfactory cues. Accordingly, research investigating whether and how humans use olfaction to navigate space is rare. In comparison, research on olfactory navigation in non-human species is abundant, and identifies behavioral strategies along with neural mechanisms characterizing the use of olfactory cues during spatial tasks. Using an ethological approach, our review draws from studies on olfactory navigation across species to describe the adaptation of strategies under the influence of selective pressure. Mammals interact with spatial environments by abstracting multisensory information into cognitive maps. We thus argue that olfactory cues, alongside inputs from other sensory modalities, play a crucial role in spatial navigation for mammalian species, including humans; that is, odors constitute one of the many building blocks in the formation of cognitive maps.
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.