| Title |
Magnetic orientation and magnetoreception in birds and other animals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, May 2005
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00359-005-0627-7 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wolfgang Wiltschko, Roswitha Wiltschko |
| Abstract |
Animals use the geomagnetic field in many ways: the magnetic vector provides a compass; magnetic intensity and/or inclination play a role as a component of the navigational 'map', and magnetic conditions of certain regions act as 'sign posts' or triggers, eliciting specific responses. A magnetic compass is widespread among animals, magnetic navigation is indicated e.g. in birds, marine turtles and spiny lobsters and the use of magnetic 'sign posts' has been described for birds and marine turtles. For magnetoreception, two hypotheses are currently discussed, one proposing a chemical compass based on a radical pair mechanism, the other postulating processes involving magnetite particles. The available evidence suggests that birds use both mechanisms, with the radical pair mechanism in the right eye providing directional information and a magnetite-based mechanism in the upper beak providing information on position as component of the 'map'. Behavioral data from other animals indicate a light-dependent compass probably based on a radical pair mechanism in amphibians and a possibly magnetite-based mechanism in mammals. Histological and electrophysiological data suggest a magnetite-based mechanism in the nasal cavities of salmonid fish. Little is known about the parts of the brain where the respective information is processed. |
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 States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 660 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 12 | 2% |
| Germany | 5 | <1% |
| Spain | 2 | <1% |
| Israel | 2 | <1% |
| France | 2 | <1% |
| Sweden | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 9 | 1% |
| Unknown | 622 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 126 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 110 | 17% |
| Researcher | 100 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 97 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 25 | 4% |
| Other | 101 | 15% |
| Unknown | 101 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 294 | 45% |
| Environmental Science | 52 | 8% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 34 | 5% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 33 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 33 | 5% |
| Other | 98 | 15% |
| Unknown | 116 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 99. 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 24 June 2023.
All research outputs
#401,297
of 24,397,600 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#11
of 1,478 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#417
of 60,376 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#2
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,397,600 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,478 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 60,376 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 7 of them.