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 |
Burst Firing in the Electrosensory System of Gymnotiform Weakly Electric Fish: Mechanisms and Functional Roles
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fncom.2016.00081 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michael G. Metzen, Rüdiger Krahe, Maurice J. Chacron |
| Abstract |
Neurons across sensory systems and organisms often display complex patterns of action potentials in response to sensory input. One example of such a pattern is the tendency of neurons to fire packets of action potentials (i.e., a burst) followed by quiescence. While it is well known that multiple mechanisms can generate bursts of action potentials at both the single-neuron and the network level, the functional role of burst firing in sensory processing is not so well understood to date. Here we provide a comprehensive review of the known mechanisms and functions of burst firing in processing of electrosensory stimuli in gymnotiform weakly electric fish. We also present new evidence from existing data showing that bursts and isolated spikes provide distinct information about stimulus variance. It is likely that these functional roles will be generally applicable to other systems and species. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Switzerland | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 29% |
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 15% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 14 | 41% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 26% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 6% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 5 | 15% |
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 02 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,685
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#1,160
of 1,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#321,775
of 366,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#36
of 40 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 366,909 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 40 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.