Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23300523›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2012

Can a threshold value be used to classify chondrichthyan reproductive modes: systematic review and validation using an oviparous species.

Holly A Frazer, Megan Ellis, Charlie Huveneers

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Embryonic specializations for vertebrate placentation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  3. Paternal nutrient provisioning during male pregnancy in the seahorse Hippocampus abdominalis.Journal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology · 2020
    Article
  4. 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

3 authors.

Holly A FrazerSchool of Biological Sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. fraz0018@flinders.edu.au
Megan Ellis
Charlie Huveneers

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The maternal-embryonic nutritional relationship in chondrichthyans has been poorly explored. Consequently, accurately discerning between their different reproductive modes is difficult; especially lecithotrophy and incipient histotrophy. This present study is the first to assess changes in mass throughout embryonic development of an oviparous chondrichthyan other than Scyliorhinus canicula. Heterodontus portusjacksoni egg cases were collected and used to quantify the gain or loss of wet mass, dry mass, water content, inorganic and organic matter from freshly deposited eggs (without macroscopically visible embryos) to near full-term embryos. A loss in organic mass of ~40% found from this study is approximately double the values previously obtained for S. canicula. This raises concerns for the validity of the current threshold value used to discern between lecithotrophic and matrotrophic species. Accordingly, 26 studies published in the primary literature between 1932 and 2012 addressing the maternal-embryonic nutritional relationship in sharks were reviewed. Values for changes in mass reported for over 20 different shark species were synthesised and recalculated, revealing multiple typographical, transcribing, calculation and rounding errors across many papers. These results suggest that the current threshold value of -20% established by previous studies is invalid and should be avoided to ascertain the reproductive mode of aplacental viviparous species.

Indexed as

OviparityAnimalsElasmobranchiiFemaleReproductionValidation Studies as TopicViviparity, Nonmammalian

Identifiers

PMID23300523
PMCPMC3531418

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.