Article in Neuroscience bulletin, 2022. 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
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 47% 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Shanping Chen *Shenzhen Key Lab of Neuropsychiatric Modulation, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Behavior, CAS Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Manipulation, the Brain Cognition and Brain Disease Institute, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science-ShenzhenFundamental Research Institutions, Shenzhen, 518055, China.
Huiying Tan *Shenzhen Key Lab of Neuropsychiatric Modulation, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Behavior, CAS Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Manipulation, the Brain Cognition and Brain Disease Institute, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science-ShenzhenFundamental Research Institutions, Shenzhen, 518055, China.
Zhijie WangShenzhen Key Lab of Neuropsychiatric Modulation, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Behavior, CAS Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Manipulation, the Brain Cognition and Brain Disease Institute, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science-ShenzhenFundamental Research Institutions, Shenzhen, 518055, China.
Yu-Ting TsengShenzhen Key Lab of Neuropsychiatric Modulation, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Behavior, CAS Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Manipulation, the Brain Cognition and Brain Disease Institute, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science-ShenzhenFundamental Research Institutions, Shenzhen, 518055, China.
Xiaotao LiShenzhen Key Lab of Neuropsychiatric Modulation, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Behavior, CAS Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Manipulation, the Brain Cognition and Brain Disease Institute, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science-ShenzhenFundamental Research Institutions, Shenzhen, 518055, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1598-1430
Liping WangShenzhen Key Lab of Neuropsychiatric Modulation, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Behavior, CAS Key Laboratory of Brain Connectome and Manipulation, the Brain Cognition and Brain Disease Institute, Shenzhen Institute of Advanced Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenzhen-Hong Kong Institute of Brain Science-ShenzhenFundamental Research Institutions, Shenzhen, 518055, China. lp.wang@siat.ac.cn.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6893-3809
University of Chinese Academy of Sciences · CNMcGovern Institute for Brain Research · USShenzhen Institute of Neuroscience · CN
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
6 · The paper itself
Abstract
Environmental threats often trigger innate defensive responses in mammals. However, the gradual development of functional properties of these responses during the postnatal development stage remains unclear. Here, we report that looming stimulation in mice evoked flight behavior commencing at P14-16 and had fully developed by P20-24. The visual-evoked innate defensive response was not significantly altered by sensory deprivation at an early postnatal stage. Furthermore, the percentages of wide-field and horizontal cells in the superior colliculus were notably elevated at P20-24. Our findings define a developmental time window for the formation of the visual innate defense response during the early postnatal period and provide important insight into the underlying mechanism.
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.
Formation of the Looming-evoked Innate Defensive Response during Postnatal Development in Mice. · full record | OpenQuestion