Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40237080›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2025

Olfactory performance explains duality of antennal architectural designs in Lepidoptera.

Mourad Jaffar-Bandjee, Thomas Engels, Thomas Steinmann, Gijs Krijnen, Jérôme Casas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2025. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  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

5 authors.

Mourad Jaffar-BandjeeInstitut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l'Insecte, UMR 7261, CNRS, Universite´ de Tours, Tours 37 200, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4610-0114
Thomas EngelsCNRS & Aix-Marseille Universite´, UMR 7287, Institut des Sciences du Mouvement Etienne-Jules Marey, Marseille 13 009, France.ORCID 0000-0002-9098-1054
Thomas SteinmannInstitut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l'Insecte, UMR 7261, CNRS, Universite´ de Tours, Tours 37 200, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2013-7747
Gijs KrijnenRobotics and Mechatronics, Technical Medical Centre, University of Twente, Enschede 7500 AE, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-9537-7123
Jérôme CasasInstitut de Recherche sur la Biologie de l'Insecte, UMR 7261, CNRS, Universite´ de Tours, Tours 37 200, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1666-295X

Funding

Alexander von Humboldt-StiftungFrance 2030IDRIS/TGCCRegion Centre-val-de-Loire
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Male attraction by females through sex pheromones is widespread among Lepidoptera, and antennae are key olfactory organs during male orientation. Broadly speaking, two designs of antennae coexist in Lepidoptera: complex (pectinate) or stick-like (filiform) ones. Pectinate antennae have attracted attention because of their multiscale geometry, assumed to outperform filiform. Yet, the filiform design is by far more common. We compare the olfactory performance of the two designs using modelling, particle image velocimetry on three-dimensional-printed scaled-up models and computational simulations. In terms of absolute odour capture, pectinate antennae perform better at nearly all flying speeds. However, when considering drag, filiform designs are more energy efficient than pectinate ones at low-flight speeds, while the reverse holds at high speeds. This is owing to the differential scaling of drag and molecule capture with flight speed. According to our results, small and slow moths would bear filiform antennae whereas big and fast moths would have pectinate ones, which is the general trend observed in nature. We discuss exceptions to this general pattern and how species could evolve from one design to the other by investigating the influence of the antennal structural elements.

Indexed as

Arthropod AntennaeMothsSmellAnimalsFemaleFlight, AnimalMaleevolutionary innovationleakinessodourolfactory sensingsaturniidae

Identifiers

PMID40237080
PMCPMC12001076

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.