ReviewiScience2022
Myths in magnetosensation.
Review in iScience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- A hybrid compass mechanism combining radical pairs and magnetite crystals.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Magnetizing Biotech-Advances in (In Vivo) Magnetic Enzyme Immobilization.Engineering in life sciences · 2025Review
- Article
- Comparison of retinol binding protein 1 with cone specific G-protein as putative effector molecules in cryptochrome signalling.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Spin Dynamics of Radical Pairs Using the Stochastic Schrödinger Equation inJournal of chemical theory and computation · 2024Article
- Through an animal's eye: the implications of diverse sensory systems in scientific experimentation.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Review
- A conserved phenylalanine motif among teleost fish provides insight for improving electromagnetic perception.Open biology · 2024Article
- A conserved phenylalanine motif among Teleost fish provides insight for improving electromagnetic perception.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Unexpected divergence in magnetoreceptor MagR from robin and pigeon linked to two sequence variations.Zoological research · 2024Article
- Harmonizing Magnetic Mitohormetic Regenerative Strategies: Developmental Implications of a Calcium-Mitochondrial Axis Invoked by Magnetic Field Exposure.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Nasal anatomy and sniffing in respiration and olfaction of wild and domestic animals.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2023Review
- Magnetic field effects in biology from the perspective of the radical pair mechanism.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ability to detect magnetic fields is a sensory modality that is used by many animals to navigate. While first postulated in the 1800s, for decades, it was considered a biological myth. A series of elegant behavioral experiments in the 1960s and 1970s showed conclusively that the sense is real; however, the underlying mechanism(s) remained unresolved. Consequently, this has given rise to a series of beliefs that are critically analyzed in this manuscript. We address six assertions: (1) Magnetoreception does not exist; (2) It has to be magnetite; (3) Birds have a conserved six loci magnetic sense system in their upper beak; (4) It has to be cryptochrome; (5) MagR is a protein biocompass; and (6) The electromagnetic induction hypothesis is dead. In advancing counter-arguments for these beliefs, we hope to stimulate debate, new ideas, and the design of well-controlled experiments that can aid our understanding of this fascinating biological phenomenon.
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.