↓ Skip to main content

Steering intermediate courses: desert ants combine information from various navigational routines

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Comparative Physiology A, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Readers on

mendeley
66 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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.
Title
Steering intermediate courses: desert ants combine information from various navigational routines
Published in
Journal of Comparative Physiology A, June 2016
DOI 10.1007/s00359-016-1094-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rüdiger Wehner, Thierry Hoinville, Holk Cruse, Ken Cheng

Abstract

A number of systems of navigation have been studied in some detail in insects. These include path integration, a system that keeps track of the straight-line distance and direction travelled on the current trip, the use of panoramic landmarks and scenery for orientation, and systematic searching. A traditional view is that only one navigational system is in operation at any one time, with different systems running in sequence depending on the context and conditions. We review selected data suggesting that often, different navigational cues (e.g., compass cues) and different systems of navigation are in operation simultaneously in desert ant navigation. The evidence suggests that all systems operate in parallel forming a heterarchical network. External and internal conditions determine the weights to be accorded to each cue and system. We also show that a model of independent modules feeding into a central summating device, the Navinet model, can in principle account for such data. No central executive processor is necessary aside from a weighted summation of the different cues and systems. Such a heterarchy of parallel systems all in operation represents a new view of insect navigation that has already been expressed informally by some authors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 66 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Portugal 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 64 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 32%
Researcher 10 15%
Student > Bachelor 8 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Professor 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 11 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 42%
Neuroscience 9 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 5%
Computer Science 3 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 13 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 01 August 2016.
All research outputs
#7,329,309
of 23,835,032 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#433
of 1,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#113,860
of 342,482 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Comparative Physiology A
#4
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,835,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,453 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 342,482 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.