Fig. 3: Electroantennogram (EAG) assays showed that PM pollution influences antennal function of houseflies.
a Uncontaminated female and b uncontaminated male houseflies were more sensitive to most concentrations of the sex pheromone, (Z)-9-Tricosene, than contaminated counterparts (Table S7, generalised linear mixed models with Tukey post hoc test, Female: Treatment: F1,169 = 11.16, P = 0.001, n = 15. Table S7, Male: Treatment: F1,169 = 36.48, P < 0.001, n = 15); uncontaminated (c) female and (d) male houseflies were more sensitive to most concentrations of food odour than their contaminated counterparts (Table S7, generalised linear mixed models with Tukey post hoc test, Female: Treatment: F1,197 = 63.19, P < 0.001, n = 15. Table S3.4, Male: Treatment: F1,197 = 47.90, P < 0.001, n = 15); e aged (7–10 days after PM exposure) contaminated female houseflies were not as sensitive to three of the four different concentrations of food lure than aged uncontaminated counterparts (Table S3.4, generalised linear mixed models with Tukey post hoc test, Treatment: F1,256 = 19.26, P < 0.001, n = 20); f the response of aged males was overall independent of contamination (Table S7, generalised linear mixed models with Tukey post hoc test, Treatment: F1,194 = 0.26, P = 0.622, n = 20). The lower and upper hinges of the box plots correspond to the 25th and 75th percentiles, the central line represents the median, and the whiskers indicates the ranges; “*” indicates significant difference and “n.s.” non-significant differences between treatment groups. All p-values are based on two-sided tests. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.
