↓ Skip to main content

Efficient Olfactory Coding in the Pheromone Receptor Neuron of a Moth

Overview of attention for article published in PLoS Computational Biology, April 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
41 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
citeulike
2 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.
Title
Efficient Olfactory Coding in the Pheromone Receptor Neuron of a Moth
Published in
PLoS Computational Biology, April 2008
DOI 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000053
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lubomir Kostal, Petr Lansky, Jean-Pierre Rospars

Abstract

The concept of coding efficiency holds that sensory neurons are adapted, through both evolutionary and developmental processes, to the statistical characteristics of their natural stimulus. Encouraged by the successful invocation of this principle to predict how neurons encode natural auditory and visual stimuli, we attempted its application to olfactory neurons. The pheromone receptor neuron of the male moth Antheraea polyphemus, for which quantitative properties of both the natural stimulus and the reception processes are available, was selected. We predicted several characteristics that the pheromone plume should possess under the hypothesis that the receptors perform optimally, i.e., transfer as much information on the stimulus per unit time as possible. Our results demonstrate that the statistical characteristics of the predicted stimulus, e.g., the probability distribution function of the stimulus concentration, the spectral density function of the stimulation course, and the intermittency, are in good agreement with those measured experimentally in the field. These results should stimulate further quantitative studies on the evolutionary adaptation of olfactory nervous systems to odorant plumes and on the plume characteristics that are most informative for the 'sniffer'. Both aspects are relevant to the design of olfactory sensors for odour-tracking robots.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 8%
Germany 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Netherlands 1 2%
Israel 1 2%
Poland 1 2%
Unknown 55 85%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 23 35%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 17%
Professor 5 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 3%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 4 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 29 45%
Neuroscience 9 14%
Engineering 6 9%
Computer Science 4 6%
Mathematics 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 9 14%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 July 2013.
All research outputs
#8,713,411
of 25,806,080 outputs
Outputs from PLoS Computational Biology
#5,683
of 9,043 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,861
of 92,787 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLoS Computational Biology
#30
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,806,080 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 9,043 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.4. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 92,787 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.