↓ Skip to main content

Presynaptic peptidergic modulation of olfactory receptor neurons in Drosophila

Overview of attention for article published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, August 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
152 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
184 Mendeley
connotea
1 Connotea
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
Presynaptic peptidergic modulation of olfactory receptor neurons in Drosophila
Published in
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, August 2009
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0813004106
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rickard Ignell, Cory M. Root, Ryan T. Birse, Jing W. Wang, Dick R. Nässel, Åsa M. E. Winther

Abstract

The role of classical neurotransmitters in the transfer and processing of olfactory information is well established in many organisms. Neuropeptide action, however, is largely unexplored in any peripheral olfactory system. A subpopulation of local interneurons (LNs) in the Drosophila antannal lobe is peptidergic, expressing Drosophila tachykinins (DTKs). We show here that olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs) express the DTK receptor (DTKR). Using two-photon microscopy, we found that DTK applied to the antennal lobe suppresses presynaptic calcium and synaptic transmission in the ORNs. Furthermore, reduction of DTKR expression in ORNs by targeted RNA interference eliminates presynaptic suppression and alters olfactory behaviors. We detect opposite behavioral phenotypes after reduction and over expression of DTKR in ORNs. Our findings suggest a presynaptic inhibitory feedback to ORNs from peptidergic LNs in the antennal lobe.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 184 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 7 4%
United States 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 174 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 53 29%
Researcher 52 28%
Student > Master 17 9%
Student > Bachelor 11 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 9 5%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 19 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 105 57%
Neuroscience 31 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 15 8%
Engineering 3 2%
Environmental Science 1 <1%
Other 7 4%
Unknown 22 12%
Attention Score in Context

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 17 August 2009.
All research outputs
#16,741,542
of 24,625,114 outputs
Outputs from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#91,769
of 101,438 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#99,512
of 116,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
#614
of 706 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,625,114 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 101,438 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.8. 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 116,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 706 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.