↓ Skip to main content

Exploratory search during directed navigation in C. elegans and Drosophila larva

Overview of attention for article published in eLife, October 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 (77th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
15 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Exploratory search during directed navigation in C. elegans and Drosophila larva
Published in
eLife, October 2017
DOI 10.7554/elife.30503
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Many organisms-from bacteria to nematodes to insect larvae-navigate their environments by biasing random movements. In these organisms, navigation in isotropic environments can be characterized as an essentially diffusive and undirected process. In stimulus gradients, movement decisions are biased to drive directed navigation toward favorable environments. How does directed navigation in a gradient modulate random exploration either parallel or orthogonal to the gradient? Here, we introduce methods originally used for analyzing protein folding trajectories to study the trajectories of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans and the Drosophila larva in isotropic environments, as well as in thermal and chemical gradients. We find that the statistics of random exploration in any direction are little affected by directed movement along a stimulus gradient. A key constraint on the behavioral strategies of these organisms appears to be the preservation of their capacity to continuously explore their environments in all directions even while moving toward favorable conditions.

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.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 15 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 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 83 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 23%
Researcher 14 17%
Student > Master 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 3 4%
Other 13 16%
Unknown 23 28%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 25 30%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 13%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 8%
Physics and Astronomy 6 7%
Engineering 4 5%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 24 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 27 January 2021.
All research outputs
#4,979,689
of 28,738,224 outputs
Outputs from eLife
#9,255
of 17,540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,294
of 347,571 outputs
Outputs of similar age from eLife
#211
of 369 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 28,738,224 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 81st percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 17,540 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.9. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 347,571 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 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 369 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.