ArticleFish physiology and biochemistry2013
Dynamics of scale regeneration in seawater- and brackish water-acclimated sea bass, Dicentrarchus labrax.
Article in Fish physiology and biochemistry, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of salinity acclimation on histological characteristics and miRNA expression profiles of scales in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss).BMC genomics · 2022Article
- The calcitonin-like system is an ancient regulatory system of biomineralization.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Persistence of the ABCC6 genes and the emergence of the bony skeleton in vertebrates.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Article
- Evolution of the angiopoietin-like gene family in teleosts and their role in skin regeneration.BMC evolutionary biology · 2017Article
- Arachidonic acid enhances turnover of the dermal skeleton: studies on zebrafish scales.PloS one · 2014Article
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 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scale loss is a common occurrence in both wild fish and those in aquaculture production systems, and regeneration of scales has been described in several freshwater species. Relatively little information exists about this process in marine fish, and in the present study, the chronology of scale regeneration was characterized in juvenile sea bass Dicentrarchus labrax, maintained in full seawater (SW; 36‰, 11.2 mM Ca(2+)) or brackish water (BW; 3.5‰, 1.1 mM Ca(2+)). Despite the significant differences in plasma osmolality, plasma calcium (Ca) and phosphorus (P) were similar between SW and BW. Removal of scales (2.25 cm(2)) did not modify plasma osmolality but a significant reduction in plasma Ca occurred in sea bass in BW during early phases of scale regeneration. Scale Ca and P contents changed during regeneration in SW and BW fish, and in fully regenerated scales, their concentration was comparable to ontogenic scales which had a Ca/P ratio around 1.0. Regenerating scales were first visible at 3 days after removal, and by 6 days, the descaled area was covered with new scales in both SW and BW fish. From this stage onwards, while scale area and mass rose gradually, a rapid accretion of calcium crystals was observed over the basal plate, especially in SW, and Ca and P content per scale increased at a very high rate, decreasing only at the later stages, and between 21 and 30 days the newly formed scales had already ontogenic-like morphometric features. Scale tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) or alkaline phosphatase (ALP) activity was initially similar in SW and BW. However, during regeneration, TRAP was significantly higher in scales of sea bass in SW compared to those in BW where ALP predominated; these differences persisted at 30 days.
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.