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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Carbon Dioxide, Odorants, Heat and Visible Cues Affect Wild Mosquito Landing in Open Spaces
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnbeh.2018.00086 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yang-Hong Zhou, Zhong-Wei Zhang, Yu-Fan Fu, Gong-Chang Zhang, Shu Yuan |
| Abstract |
CO2 and other chemicals affect mosquito blood meal seeking behavior. Heat, humidity and black color can also serve as orientation cues. However mosquito attraction does not necessarily mean that it will land. The sequence of the cues used for mosquito landing is unclear. We performed a field study with wild mosquitoes in an open space and found that no chemicals (except pyrethrins) could completely prevent mosquitoes from landing. CO2 mimics cyclopentanone and pyridine attracted mosquitoes but did not lead to landing. No mosquito was caught in the absence of heat, although in the presence of CO2. Mosquito females commonly explore visible black objects by eyes, which is independent of infrared radiation. Humidification around the heat source may increase the detection distance but it did not affect mosquito landing. If a black object was located distant from the CO2 and heat, mosquitoes still explored the heat source. Relative to CO2 and heat, odorants, humidity and black color show lesser effects on mosquito landing. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 33% |
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 50 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 14% |
| Researcher | 6 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 18 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 6 | 12% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 10% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 6% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 24% |
| Unknown | 19 | 38% |
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 12 May 2018.
All research outputs
#17,945,904
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#2,428
of 3,202 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#237,782
of 327,926 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#56
of 63 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,202 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 327,926 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 63 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.