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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Chapter title |
In Vivo Two-Photon Imaging of the Olfactory System in Insects
|
|---|---|
| Chapter number | 15 |
| Book title |
Olfactory Receptors
|
| Published in |
Methods in molecular biology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/978-1-4939-8609-5_15 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Book ISBNs |
978-1-4939-8608-8, 978-1-4939-8609-5
|
| Authors |
Marco Paoli, Albrecht Haase, Paoli, Marco, Haase, Albrecht |
| Abstract |
This chapter describes how to apply two-photon neuroimaging to study the insect olfactory system in vivo. It provides a complete protocol for insect brain functional imaging, with some additional remarks on the acquisition of morphological information from the living brain. We discuss the most important choices to make when buying or building a two-photon laser-scanning microscope. We illustrate different possibilities of animal preparation and brain tissue labeling for in vivo imaging. Finally, we give an overview of the main methods of image data processing and analysis, followed by a short description of pioneering applications of this imaging modality. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 29% |
| Researcher | 6 | 25% |
| Professor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 21% |
| Neuroscience | 5 | 21% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 3 | 13% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 August 2018.
All research outputs
#15,866,607
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Methods in molecular biology
#5,555
of 13,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,979
of 444,928 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Methods in molecular biology
#593
of 1,483 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,410 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 444,928 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,483 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.