↓ Skip to main content

Clusters of iron-rich cells in the upper beak of pigeons are macrophages not magnetosensitive neurons

Overview of attention for article published in Nature, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
161 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
269 Mendeley
citeulike
4 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
Clusters of iron-rich cells in the upper beak of pigeons are macrophages not magnetosensitive neurons
Published in
Nature, April 2012
DOI 10.1038/nature11046
Pubmed ID
Authors

Christoph Daniel Treiber, Marion Claudia Salzer, Johannes Riegler, Nathaniel Edelman, Cristina Sugar, Martin Breuss, Paul Pichler, Herve Cadiou, Martin Saunders, Mark Lythgoe, Jeremy Shaw, David Anthony Keays

Abstract

Understanding the molecular and cellular mechanisms that mediate magnetosensation in vertebrates is a formidable scientific problem. One hypothesis is that magnetic information is transduced into neuronal impulses by using a magnetite-based magnetoreceptor. Previous studies claim to have identified a magnetic sense system in the pigeon, common to avian species, which consists of magnetite-containing trigeminal afferents located at six specific loci in the rostral subepidermis of the beak. These studies have been widely accepted in the field and heavily relied upon by both behavioural biologists and physicists. Here we show that clusters of iron-rich cells in the rostro-medial upper beak of the pigeon Columbia livia are macrophages, not magnetosensitive neurons. Our systematic characterization of the pigeon upper beak identified iron-rich cells in the stratum laxum of the subepidermis, the basal region of the respiratory epithelium and the apex of feather follicles. Using a three-dimensional blueprint of the pigeon beak created by magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography, we mapped the location of iron-rich cells, revealing unexpected variation in their distribution and number--an observation that is inconsistent with a role in magnetic sensation. Ultrastructure analysis of these cells, which are not unique to the beak, showed that their subcellular architecture includes ferritin-like granules, siderosomes, haemosiderin and filopodia, characteristics of iron-rich macrophages. Our conclusion that these cells are macrophages and not magnetosensitive neurons is supported by immunohistological studies showing co-localization with the antigen-presenting molecule major histocompatibility complex class II. Our work necessitates a renewed search for the true magnetite-dependent magnetoreceptor in birds.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 60 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 269 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 3%
United Kingdom 4 1%
Germany 3 1%
Italy 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Turkey 1 <1%
Peru 1 <1%
Other 7 3%
Unknown 242 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 64 24%
Researcher 64 24%
Student > Master 37 14%
Student > Bachelor 24 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 12 4%
Other 38 14%
Unknown 30 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 118 44%
Neuroscience 23 9%
Chemistry 18 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 6%
Physics and Astronomy 16 6%
Other 40 15%
Unknown 37 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 289. 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 12 September 2023.
All research outputs
#124,437
of 25,856,138 outputs
Outputs from Nature
#8,198
of 98,933 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#469
of 174,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature
#39
of 1,037 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,856,138 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 98,933 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 102.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 174,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,037 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.