| Title |
Effects of pars intercerebralis removal on circatidal rhythm in the mangrove cricket, Apteronemobius asahinai
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, August 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00359-018-1281-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hiroki Takekata, Hideharu Numata, Sakiko Shiga |
| Abstract |
The circatidal rhythm is an endogenous rhythm corresponding to the tidal cycles, and its neural mechanism remains unknown. The mangrove cricket, Apteronemobius asahinai, possesses both circatidal and circadian clocks, and simultaneously exhibits circatidal and circadian rhythms in its locomotor activity. In a previous study, we showed that surgical removal of the optic lobes, the principal circadian clock locus in crickets, disrupted their circadian rhythm, but not their circatidal rhythm. In this study, we focused on the pars intercerebralis (PI) because surgical removal of the PI disrupts the circadian rhythm and causes arrhythmic activity in some cricket species. After surgical removal of the PI, the proportion of crickets displaying circatidal rhythm decreased, and more than half of the crickets exhibited arrhythmic activity. Surgical removal of the regions around the PI also caused a similar effect on locomotor activity. Our results indicate that the PI and/or its surrounding regions are important not only for circadian but also for circatidal rhythm. This suggests the presence of a neural or hormonal pathway in the PI and/or its surrounding regions that is common to the circatidal and circadian rhythms. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 20 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 15% |
| Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 10% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 20% |
| Unknown | 5 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 6 | 30% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 15% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 10% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 6 | 30% |
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 28 October 2019.
All research outputs
#19,221,261
of 23,815,455 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#1,225
of 1,450 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#259,880
of 336,519 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#9
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,815,455 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% 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 5th percentile – i.e., 5% 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 336,519 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.