↓ Skip to main content

Sloppy morphological tuning in identified neurons of the crustacean stomatogastric ganglion

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (76th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
citeulike
7 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.
Article details
Title
Sloppy morphological tuning in identified neurons of the crustacean stomatogastric ganglion
Published in
eLife, February 2017
DOI 10.7554/elife.22352
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Neuronal physiology depends on a neuron's ion channel composition and unique morphology. Variable ion channel compositions can produce similar neuronal physiologies across animals. Less is known regarding the morphological precision required to produce reliable neuronal physiology. Theoretical studies suggest that morphology is tightly tuned to minimize wiring and conduction delay of synaptic events. We utilize high-resolution confocal microscopy and custom computational tools to characterize the morphologies of four neuron types in the stomatogastric ganglion (STG) of the crab Cancer borealis. Macroscopic branching patterns and fine cable properties are variable within and across neuron types. We compare these neuronal structures to synthetic minimal spanning neurite trees constrained by a wiring cost equation and find that STG neurons do not adhere to prevailing hypotheses regarding wiring optimization principles. In this highly-modulated and oscillating circuit, neuronal structures appear to be governed by a space-filling mechanism that outweighs the cost of inefficient wiring.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 60 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 38%
Researcher 14 23%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 7%
Student > Master 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 24 39%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 17 28%
Engineering 4 7%
Mathematics 2 3%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 9 15%
Attention Score in Context

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 05 February 2021.
All research outputs
#6,142,376
of 29,624,838 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#10,240
of 18,010 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,436
of 437,324 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#204
of 348 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 29,624,838 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 18,010 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.4. 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 437,324 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 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 348 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.