Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26038712›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2015

Copepods enhance nutritional status, growth and development in Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua L.) larvae - can we identify the underlying factors?

Ørjan Karlsen, Terje van der Meeren, Ivar Rønnestad, Anders Mangor-Jensen, Trina F Galloway, Elin Kjørsvik, Kristin Hamre

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
22.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 90 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Early Feeding Strategies for the Larviculture of the Vermiculated AngelfishAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Ørjan KarlsenInstitute of Marine Research, Austevoll Research Station , Storebø , Norway ; Hjort Centre for Marine Ecosystem Dynamics, Institute of Marine Research , Bergen , Norway.
Terje van der MeerenInstitute of Marine Research, Austevoll Research Station , Storebø , Norway ; Hjort Centre for Marine Ecosystem Dynamics, Institute of Marine Research , Bergen , Norway.
Ivar RønnestadDepartment of Biology, University of Bergen , Bergen , Norway.
Anders Mangor-JensenInstitute of Marine Research, Austevoll Research Station , Storebø , Norway.
Trina F GallowaySINTEF Fisheries and Aquaculture , Trondheim , Norway.
Elin KjørsvikDepartment of Biology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology , Trondheim , Norway.
Kristin HamreNational Institute of Nutrition and Seafood Research , Nordnes, Bergen , Norway.
Norwegian Institute of Marine Research · NONorwegian University of Science and Technology · NOSINTEF · NOUniversity of Bergen · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current commercial production protocols for Atlantic cod depend on enriched rotifers and Artemia during first-feeding, but development and growth remain inferior to fish fed natural zooplankton. Two experiments were conducted in order to identify the underlying factors for this phenomenon. In the first experiment (Exp-1), groups of cod larvae were fed either (a) natural zooplankton, mainly copepods, increasing the size of prey as the larvae grew or (b) enriched rotifers followed by Artemia (the intensive group). In the second experiment (Exp-2), two groups of larvae were fed as in Exp-1, while a third group was fed copepod nauplii (approximately the size of rotifers) throughout the larval stage. In both experiments, growth was not significantly different between the groups during the first three weeks after hatching, but from the last part of the rotifer feeding period and onwards, the growth of the larvae fed copepods was higher than that of the intensive group. In Exp-2, the growth was similar between the two copepod groups during the expeimental period, indicating that nutrient composition, not prey size caused the better growth on copepods. Analyses of the prey showed that total fatty acid composition and the ratio of phospholipids to total lipids was slightly different in the prey organisms, and that protein, taurine, astaxanthin and zinc were lower on a dry weight basis in rotifers than in copepods. Other measured nutrients as DHA, all analysed vitamins, manganese, copper and selenium were similar or higher in the rotifers. When compared to the present knowledge on nutrient requirements, protein and taurine appeared to be the most likely limiting nutrients for growth in cod larvae fed rotifers and Artemia. Larvae fed rotifers/Artemia had a higher whole body lipid content than larvae fed copepods at the end of the experiment (stage 5) after the fish had been fed the same formulated diet for approximately 2 weeks.

Indexed as

ArtemiaAtlantic codCopepodsGadus morhuaLarvaeNatural zooplanktonNutritionRotifersStart feedingTaurine

Identifiers

PMID26038712
PMCPMC4451035
OpenAlexW1015033914

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.