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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
A female-specific attractant for the codling moth, Cydia pomonella, from apple fruit volatiles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Science of Nature, November 2003
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00114-003-0484-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Alan Hern, Silvia Dorn |
| Abstract |
Host plant-derived esters were investigated as potential female-specific attractants for the codling moth (CM), Cydia pomonella (L.), a key pest of apples worldwide. The behavioural effects of single and combined volatile compounds and of a natural odour blend were examined using olfactometry and wind-tunnel bioassays. The apple-derived volatile butyl hexanoate attracted mated females while it was behaviourally ineffective for males over a dosage range of more than three orders of magnitude in olfactometer assays. Female CM preferred this kairomone to the headspace volatiles from ripe apples. Both no-choice and choice trials in the wind-tunnel suggested that female moths might be effectively trapped by means of this compound. In contrast, headspace volatiles collected from ripe apple fruits as well as a blend containing the six dominant esters from ripe apples were behaviourally ineffective. A female-specific repellency was found for the component hexyl acetate in the olfactometer, but this ester had no significant effect in the wind-tunnel. Butyl hexanoate with its sex-specific attraction should be further evaluated for monitoring and controlling CM females in orchards. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 2% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 2% |
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| Benin | 1 | 2% |
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 42 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 27% |
| Researcher | 12 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 6 | 12% |
| Unknown | 4 | 8% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 35 | 71% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 2% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 4 | 8% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 October 2017.
All research outputs
#8,534,528
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from The Science of Nature
#856
of 2,263 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,033
of 59,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Science of Nature
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,263 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% 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 59,932 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.