↓ Skip to main content

Volatile secondary metabolites as aposematic olfactory signals and defensive weapons in aquatic environments

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
18 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
94 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Volatile secondary metabolites as aposematic olfactory signals and defensive weapons in aquatic environments
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, March 2017
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1614655114
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giuseppe Giordano, Marianna Carbone, Maria Letizia Ciavatta, Eleonora Silvano, Margherita Gavagnin, Mary J. Garson, Karen L. Cheney, I Wayan Mudianta, Giovanni Fulvio Russo, Guido Villani, Laura Magliozzi, Gianluca Polese, Christian Zidorn, Adele Cutignano, Angelo Fontana, Michael T. Ghiselin, Ernesto Mollo

Abstract

Olfaction is considered a distance sense; hence, aquatic olfaction is thought to be mediated only by molecules dissolved in water. Here, we challenge this view by showing that shrimp and fish can recognize the presence of hydrophobic olfactory cues by a "tactile" form of chemoreception. We found that odiferous furanosesquiterpenes protect both the Mediterranean octocoral Maasella edwardsi and its specialist predator, the nudibranch gastropod Tritonia striata, from potential predators. Food treated with the terpenes elicited avoidance responses in the cooccurring shrimp Palaemon elegans Rejection was also induced in the shrimp by the memory recall of postingestive aversive effects (vomiting), evoked by repeatedly touching the food with chemosensory mouthparts. Consistent with their emetic properties once ingested, the compounds were highly toxic to brine shrimp. Further experiments on the zebrafish showed that this vertebrate aquatic model also avoids food treated with one of the terpenes, after having experienced gastrointestinal malaise. The fish refused the food after repeatedly touching it with their mouths. The compounds studied thus act simultaneously as (i) toxins, (ii) avoidance-learning inducers, and (iii) aposematic odorant cues. Although they produce a characteristic smell when exposed to air, the compounds are detected by direct contact with the emitter in aquatic environments and are perceived at high doses that are not compatible with their transport in water. The mouthparts of both the shrimp and the fish have thus been shown to act as "aquatic noses," supporting a substantial revision of the current definition of the chemical senses based upon spatial criteria.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 18 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 94 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Germany 1 1%
Unknown 92 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 19 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 14%
Student > Master 11 12%
Professor 7 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 6%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 23 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 31%
Chemistry 10 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 9%
Environmental Science 8 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 4%
Other 10 11%
Unknown 25 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 08 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,251,152
of 24,679,965 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#18,043
of 101,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#25,225
of 313,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#363
of 964 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,679,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 101,619 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its peers.
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 313,336 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 964 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 62% of its contemporaries.