Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24385049›Full record

ReviewInvertebrate neuroscience : IN2014

Cephalopods in neuroscience: regulations, research and the 3Rs.

Graziano Fiorito, Andrea Affuso, David B Anderson, Jennifer Basil, Laure Bonnaud, Giovanni Botta, Alison Cole, Livia D'Angelo, Paolo De Girolamo, Ngaire Dennison and 25 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Invertebrate neuroscience : IN, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 65 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
65citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

65 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Cephalopod Behavior: From Neural Plasticity to Consciousness.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Assessing Local Anesthesia in Octopus bimaculoides to Provide Analgesia.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026
    Article
  6. A non-invasive method to genotype cephalopod sex by quantitative PCR.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Stress Induced by Fishing in Common Octopus (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  10. "Killing in the Name of 3R?" The Ethics of Death in Animal Research.Journal of agricultural & environmental ethics · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Functional organization of visual responses in the octopus optic lobe.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

5 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

35 authors.

Graziano FioritoStazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, Villa Comunale, Naples, Italy, cephres@cephalopodresearch.org.
Andrea Affuso
David B Anderson
Jennifer Basil
Laure Bonnaud
Giovanni Botta
Alison Cole
Livia D'Angelo
Paolo De Girolamo
Ngaire Dennison
Ludovic Dickel
Anna Di Cosmo
Carlo Di Cristo
Camino Gestal
Rute Fonseca
Frank Grasso
Tore Kristiansen
Michael Kuba
Fulvio Maffucci
Arianna Manciocco
Felix Christopher Mark
Daniela Melillo
Daniel Osorio
Anna Palumbo
Kerry Perkins
Giovanna Ponte
Marcello Raspa
Nadav Shashar
Jane Smith
David Smith
António Sykes
Roger Villanueva
Nathan Tublitz
Letizia Zullo
Paul Andrews

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cephalopods have been utilised in neuroscience research for more than 100 years particularly because of their phenotypic plasticity, complex and centralised nervous system, tractability for studies of learning and cellular mechanisms of memory (e.g. long-term potentiation) and anatomical features facilitating physiological studies (e.g. squid giant axon and synapse). On 1 January 2013, research using any of the about 700 extant species of "live cephalopods" became regulated within the European Union by Directive 2010/63/EU on the "Protection of Animals used for Scientific Purposes", giving cephalopods the same EU legal protection as previously afforded only to vertebrates. The Directive has a number of implications, particularly for neuroscience research. These include: (1) projects will need justification, authorisation from local competent authorities, and be subject to review including a harm-benefit assessment and adherence to the 3Rs principles (Replacement, Refinement and Reduction). (2) To support project evaluation and compliance with the new EU law, guidelines specific to cephalopods will need to be developed, covering capture, transport, handling, housing, care, maintenance, health monitoring, humane anaesthesia, analgesia and euthanasia. (3) Objective criteria need to be developed to identify signs of pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm particularly in the context of their induction by an experimental procedure. Despite diversity of views existing on some of these topics, this paper reviews the above topics and describes the approaches being taken by the cephalopod research community (represented by the authorship) to produce "guidelines" and the potential contribution of neuroscience research to cephalopod welfare.

Indexed as

CephalopodaAnimal ExperimentationAnimalsAnimal WelfareEuropean UnionGuidelines as TopicNeurosciences

Identifiers

PMID24385049
PMCPMC3938841

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.