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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Behavioral and Physiological Evidence for Palp Detection of the Male-Specific Attractant Cuelure in the Queensland Fruit Fly (Bactrocera tryoni)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2018.00990 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas A. Verschut, Kevin Farnier, J. Paul Cunningham, Mikael A. Carlsson |
| Abstract |
The Queensland fruit fly, Bactrocera tryoni, is considered one of the worst horticultural pests in Australia attacking a large variety of fruit crops. To defeat pest insects, olfactory attractants have been developed and widely used in lure and kill strategies. Male B. tryoni are strongly attracted to the compound raspberry ketone and its synthetic analog, cuelure. Despite the strong behavioral response, a recent study failed to show any activation of antennal receptors to cuelure. Therefore, we hypothesized that cuelure may be detected by an accessory olfactory organ, the maxillary palp. Combining behavioral and physiological experiments we clearly demonstrate that male flies, but not female flies, primarily use the maxillary palps and not the antennae to detect and respond to cuelure. Furthermore, regardless of satiety status, male flies always preferred cuelure over a sugar rich source, unless the maxillary palps were excised. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 18% |
| Researcher | 4 | 18% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 9 | 41% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 7 | 32% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 45% |
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 26 July 2018.
All research outputs
#18,643,992
of 23,096,849 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#8,268
of 13,846 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,247
of 330,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#340
of 479 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,096,849 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,846 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 330,319 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 479 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.