| Title |
Release from bats: genetic distance and sensoribehavioural regression in the Pacific field cricket, Teleogryllus oceanicus
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Science of Nature, September 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00114-009-0610-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James H. Fullard, Hannah M. ter Hofstede, John M. Ratcliffe, Gerald S. Pollack, Gian S. Brigidi, Robin M. Tinghitella, Marlene Zuk |
| Abstract |
The auditory thresholds of the AN2 interneuron and the behavioural thresholds of the anti-bat flight-steering responses that this cell evokes are less sensitive in female Pacific field crickets that live where bats have never existed (Moorea) compared with individuals subjected to intense levels of bat predation (Australia). In contrast, the sensitivity of the auditory interneuron, ON1 which participates in the processing of both social signals and bat calls, and the thresholds for flight orientation to a model of the calling song of male crickets show few differences between the two populations. Genetic analyses confirm that the two populations are significantly distinct, and we conclude that the absence of bats has caused partial regression in the nervous control of a defensive behaviour in this insect. This study represents the first examination of natural evolutionary regression in the neural basis of a behaviour along a selection gradient within a single species. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 7% |
| Germany | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 2% |
| Japan | 1 | 2% |
| Romania | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 49 | 84% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 26% |
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 8 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 6 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 35 | 60% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Psychology | 2 | 3% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 10 | 17% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 November 2009.
All research outputs
#4,758,757
of 23,794,258 outputs
Outputs from The Science of Nature
#555
of 2,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,265
of 95,223 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Science of Nature
#8
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,794,258 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 95,223 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.