Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21533134›Full record

ArticlePloS one2011

Proteomics of buccal cavity mucus in female tilapia fish (Oreochromis spp.): a comparison between parental and non-parental fish.

Koe Chun Iq, Alexander Chong Shu-Chien

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Skin Mucus of Gilthead Sea Bream (Frontiers in physiology · 2017
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Koe Chun IqSchool of Biological Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Minden, Penang, Malaysia.
Alexander Chong Shu-Chien
Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation · MYUniversiti Sains Malaysia · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mouthbrooding is an elaborate form of parental care displayed by many teleost species. While the direct benefits of mouthbrooding such as protection and transportation of offsprings are known, it is unclear if mouthbrooding offers additional benefits to embryos during incubation. In addition, mouthbrooding could incur negative costs on parental fish, due to limited feeding opportunities. Parental tilapia fish (Oreochromis spp.) display an elaborated form of parental care by incubating newly hatched embryos in oral buccal cavity until the complete adsorption of yolk sac. In order to understand the functional aspects of mouthbrooding, we undertake a proteomics approach to compare oral mucus sampled from mouthbrooders and non-mouthbrooders, respectively. Majority of the identified proteins have also been previously identified in other biological fluids or mucus-rich organs in different organisms. We also showed the upregulation of 22 proteins and down regulation of 3 proteins in mucus collected from mouthbrooders. Anterior gradient protein, hemoglobin beta-A chain and alpha-2 globin levels were lower in mouthbrooder samples. Mouthbrooder oral mucus collectively showed increase levels of proteins related to cytoskeletal properties, glycolytic pathway and mediation of oxidative stress. Overall the findings suggest cellular stress response, probably to support production of mucus during mouthbrooding phase.

Indexed as

ProteomicsAnimalsElectrophoresis, Gel, Two-DimensionalFemaleMass SpectrometryMouth MucosaMucusTilapia

Identifiers

PMID21533134
PMCPMC3080365
OpenAlexW1984830569

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.