↓ Skip to main content

The mechanical leg response to vibration stimuli in cave crickets and implications for vibrosensory organ functions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Physiology A, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
The mechanical leg response to vibration stimuli in cave crickets and implications for vibrosensory organ functions
Published in
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, June 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00359-018-1271-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nataša Stritih Peljhan, Johannes Strauß

Abstract

We investigate the influence of leg mechanics on the vibration input and function of vibrosensitive organs in the legs of the cave cricket Troglophilus neglectus, using laser Doppler vibrometry. By varying leg attachment, leg flexion, and body posture, we identify important influences on the amplitude and frequency parameters of transmitted vibrations. The legs respond best to relatively high-frequency vibration (200-2000 Hz), but in strong dependence on the leg position; the response peak shifts progressively over 500-1400 Hz towards higher frequencies following leg flexion. The response is amplified most strongly on the tibia, where specialised vibrosensory organs occur, and the response amplitude increases with the increasing frequency. Leg responses peaking at 800 and 1400 Hz closely resemble the tuning of the intermediate organ receptors in the proximal tibia of T. neglectus, which may be highly sensitive to positional change. The legs of free-standing animals with the abdomen touching the vibrating substrate show a secondary response peak below 150 Hz, induced by body vibration. Such responses may significantly increase the sensitivity of low-frequency receptors in the tibial accessory organ and the femoral chordotonal organ. The cave cricket legs appear suitable especially for detection of high-frequency vibration.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 15%
Student > Master 4 15%
Other 3 12%
Professor 3 12%
Researcher 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 8 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 27%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 19%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 4%
Computer Science 1 4%
Physics and Astronomy 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 10 38%
Attention Score in Context

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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#21,164,509
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#1,366
of 1,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#290,116
of 329,997 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#8
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,450 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 329,997 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.