Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34847788›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2021

Downstroke and upstroke conflict during banked turns in butterflies.

P Henningsson, L C Johansson

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Kinematic and Aerodynamic Analysis of aBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Downstroke and upstroke conflict during banked turns in butterflies.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2021
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

P HenningssonDepartment of Biology, Lund University, Ecology Building, Sölvegatan 37, Lund 223 62, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0003-2640-1067
L C JohanssonDepartment of Biology, Lund University, Ecology Building, Sölvegatan 37, Lund 223 62, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1851-3635
Lund University · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

For all flyers, aeroplanes or animals, making banked turns involve a rolling motion which, due to higher induced drag on the outer than the inner wing, results in a yawing torque opposite to the turn. This adverse yaw torque can be counteracted using a tail, but how animals that lack tail, e.g. all insects, handle this problem is not fully understood. Here, we quantify the performance of turning take-off flights in butterflies and find that they use force vectoring during banked turns without fully compensating for adverse yaw. This lowers their turning performance, increasing turn radius, since thrust becomes misaligned with the flight path. The separation of function between downstroke (lift production) and upstroke (thrust production) in our butterflies, in combination with a more pronounced adverse yaw during the upstroke increases the misalignment of the thrust. This may be a cost the butterflies pay for the efficient thrust-generating upstroke clap, but also other insects fail to rectify adverse yaw during escape manoeuvres, suggesting a general feature in functionally two-winged insect flight. When lacking tail and left with costly approaches to counteract adverse yaw, costs of flying with adverse yaw may be outweighed by the benefits of maintaining thrust and flight speed.

Indexed as

ButterfliesAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaFlight, AnimalInsectaModels, BiologicalWings, Animalaerodynamicsbutterfliesflightmanoeuvring

Identifiers

PMID34847788
PMCPMC8633796
OpenAlexW3215670446

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.