↓ Skip to main content

Ionotropic Receptor-dependent moist and dry cells control hygrosensation in Drosophila

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (63rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
34 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor

Readers on

mendeley
116 Mendeley
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
Ionotropic Receptor-dependent moist and dry cells control hygrosensation in Drosophila
Published in
eLife, June 2017
DOI 10.7554/elife.26654
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Insects use hygrosensation (humidity sensing) to avoid desiccation and, in vectors such as mosquitoes, to locate vertebrate hosts. Sensory neurons activated by either dry or moist air ('dry cells' and 'moist cells') have been described in many insects, but their behavioral roles and the molecular basis of their hygrosensitivity remain unclear. We recently reported that Drosophila hygrosensation relies on three Ionotropic Receptors (IRs) required for dry cell function: IR25a, IR93a and IR40a (Knecht et al., 2016). Here we discover Drosophila moist cells, and show they require IR25a and IR93a together with IR68a, a conserved, but orphan IR. Both IR68a- and IR40a-dependent pathways drive hygrosensory behavior: each is important for dry-seeking by hydrated flies and together they underlie moist-seeking by dehydrated flies. These studies reveal that humidity sensing in Drosophila, and likely other insects, involves the combined activity of two molecularly related but neuronally distinct hygrosensing systems.

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 34 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 116 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 116 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 19%
Researcher 18 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 9%
Student > Master 6 5%
Other 5 4%
Other 19 16%
Unknown 36 31%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 24%
Neuroscience 23 20%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 15%
Unspecified 2 2%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Other 6 5%
Unknown 39 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 25 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,481,002
of 32,192,432 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#5,918
of 18,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,366
of 337,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#142
of 387 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,192,432 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 18,462 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% 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 337,267 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 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 387 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.