Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41460883›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Background optic flow modulates responses of multiple descending interneurons to object motion in locusts.

Sinan Zhang, John R Gray

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Sinan ZhangDepartment of Biology, College of Arts and Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6955-603X
John R GrayDepartment of Biology, College of Arts and Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Animals flying within natural environments are constantly challenged with complex visual information. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the impact of the visual background on the motion detection system. Locusts possess a well-identified looming detection pathway, comprising the lobula giant movement detector (LGMD) and the descending contralateral movement detector (DCMD). The LGMD/DCMD pathway responds preferably to objects on a collision course, and the response of this pathway is affected by the background complexity. However, multiple other neurons are also responsive to looming stimuli. In this study, we presented looming stimuli against different visual backgrounds to a rigidly-tethered locust, and simultaneously recorded the neural activity with a multichannel electrode. We found that the number of spike-sorted units that responded to looms was not affected by the visual background. However, the peak times of these units were delayed, and the rise phase was shortened in the presence of a flow field background. Dynamic factor analysis (DFA) revealed that fewer types of common trends were present among the units responding to looming stimuli against the flow field background, and the response begin time was delayed among the common trends as well. These results suggest that background complexity affects the response of multiple motion-sensitive neurons, yet the animal is still capable of responding to potentially hazardous visual stimuli.

Indexed as

GrasshoppersInterneuronsMotion PerceptionOptic FlowAnimalsPhotic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID41460883
PMCPMC12747386

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.