↓ Skip to main content

Taste and smell in aquatic and terrestrial environments

Overview of attention for article published in Natural Product Reports, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
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
Taste and smell in aquatic and terrestrial environments
Published in
Natural Product Reports, January 2017
DOI 10.1039/c7np00008a
Pubmed ID
Authors

E. Mollo, M. J. Garson, G. Polese, P. Amodeo, M. T. Ghiselin

Abstract

Covering: up to 2017The review summarizes results up to 2017 on chemosensory cues occurring in both aquatic and terrestrial environments. The chemicals are grouped by their physicochemical properties to compare their potential mobility in the different media. In contrast to what is widely asserted in the literature, the report emphasizes that living organisms encounter and sense molecules of various degrees of solubility and volatility both on land and in aquatic environments. The picture that emerges from the review suggests a substantial revision of the traditional definitions of the chemical senses based on their spatial range, which is currently orienting the literature on chemosensory signaling, in favor of a new vision based on the natural products that are the actual mediators of the chemosensory perceptions. According to this perspective, natural product chemistry is a powerful tool with which to explore the evolutionary history of the chemical senses.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 80 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 21 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 15%
Student > Master 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 20 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 25%
Chemistry 7 9%
Environmental Science 7 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 9%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Other 8 10%
Unknown 25 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 26 May 2017.
All research outputs
#13,856,443
of 22,965,074 outputs
Outputs from Natural Product Reports
#848
of 1,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,930
of 421,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Natural Product Reports
#37
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,965,074 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 421,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.