↓ Skip to main content

Attempts to retreat from a dead-ended long capillary by backward swimming in Paramecium

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 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.
Title
Attempts to retreat from a dead-ended long capillary by backward swimming in Paramecium
Published in
Frontiers in Microbiology, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fmicb.2014.00270
Pubmed ID
Authors

Itsuki Kunita, Shigeru Kuroda, Kaito Ohki, Toshiyuki Nakagaki

Abstract

We have observed how the ciliate Paramecium attempts to retreat from the dead-end of a long capillary that is too narrow for turning. After many trial-and-error episodes of short-term backward swimming (SBS), which is the conventional avoidance behavior exhibited in free swimming when an obstacle is faced, long-term backward swimming (LBS) that lasted five to ten times longer was developed. LBS may have a beneficial effect for complete withdrawal from the capillary space, although in our experiment it was impossible for the organism to do so due to the capillary length. In order to identify a physically possible mechanism for LBS, we propose model equations for the membrane potential of Hodgkin-Huxley type, which describe the control of ciliary movement. The physiological implications and physical mechanism of the development of LBS are discussed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Russia 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 26%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 17%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 9%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 4 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 8 35%
Engineering 3 13%
Neuroscience 2 9%
Mathematics 1 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 4%
Other 3 13%
Unknown 5 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 02 July 2021.
All research outputs
#1,918,268
of 22,756,196 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Microbiology
#1,380
of 24,628 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,505
of 228,655 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Microbiology
#17
of 176 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,756,196 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 24,628 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 228,655 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 176 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 90% of its contemporaries.