| Title |
Parallel processing in the honeybee olfactory pathway: structure, function, and evolution
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, April 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00359-013-0821-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wolfgang Rössler, Martin F. Brill |
| Abstract |
Animals face highly complex and dynamic olfactory stimuli in their natural environments, which require fast and reliable olfactory processing. Parallel processing is a common principle of sensory systems supporting this task, for example in visual and auditory systems, but its role in olfaction remained unclear. Studies in the honeybee focused on a dual olfactory pathway. Two sets of projection neurons connect glomeruli in two antennal-lobe hemilobes via lateral and medial tracts in opposite sequence with the mushroom bodies and lateral horn. Comparative studies suggest that this dual-tract circuit represents a unique adaptation in Hymenoptera. Imaging studies indicate that glomeruli in both hemilobes receive redundant sensory input. Recent simultaneous multi-unit recordings from projection neurons of both tracts revealed widely overlapping response profiles strongly indicating parallel olfactory processing. Whereas lateral-tract neurons respond fast with broad (generalistic) profiles, medial-tract neurons are odorant specific and respond slower. In analogy to "what-" and "where" subsystems in visual pathways, this suggests two parallel olfactory subsystems providing "what-" (quality) and "when" (temporal) information. Temporal response properties may support across-tract coincidence coding in higher centers. Parallel olfactory processing likely enhances perception of complex odorant mixtures to decode the diverse and dynamic olfactory world of a social insect. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 123 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 4 | 3% |
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Indonesia | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 113 | 92% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 24% |
| Researcher | 28 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 19 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 15 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 70 | 57% |
| Neuroscience | 19 | 15% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 6 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 3% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 7 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 13% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2013.
All research outputs
#13,707,565
of 23,835,032 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#941
of 1,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#103,403
of 196,968 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#8
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,835,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,453 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 196,968 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.