ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2012
To feed or to breed: morphological constraints of mouthbrooding in coral reef cardinalfishes.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex and male breeding state predict intraspecific trait variation in mouth-brooding fishes.Journal of fish biology · 2022Article
- Hydrodynamic drag constrains head enlargement for mouthbrooding in cichlids.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2015Article
- Functional coupling constrains craniofacial diversification in Lake Tanganyika cichlids.Biology letters · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Functionally coupled biomechanical systems are widespread in nature and are viewed as major constraints on evolutionary diversification, yet there have been few attempts to explore the implications of performing multiple functions within a single anatomical structure. Paternally mouthbrooding cardinalfishes present an ideal system to investigate the constraints of functional coupling as the oral jaws of male fishes are directly responsible for both feeding and reproductive functions. To test the effects of (i) mouthbrooding on feeding and (ii) feeding on reproductive potential we compared the feeding apparatus between sexes of nine species of cardinalfish and compared brood characteristics among species from different trophic groups, respectively. Mouthbrooding was strongly associated with the morphology of the feeding apparatus in males. Male cardinalfishes possessed longer heads, snouts and jaws than female conspecifics irrespective of body size, trophic group or evolutionary history. Conversely, reproductive potential also appeared to be related to trophic morphology. Piscivorous cardinalfishes produced larger, but fewer eggs, and had smaller brood volumes than species from the two invertebrate feeding groups. These interrelationships suggest that feeding and reproduction in the mouth of cardinalfishes may be tightly coupled. If so this may, in part, have contributed to the limited morphological diversification exhibited by cardinalfishes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.