Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26290783›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2015

Vision in two cyprinid fish: implications for collective behavior.

Diana Pita, Bret A Moore, Luke P Tyrrell, Esteban Fernández-Juricic

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 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
16.6field-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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Collective detection based on visual information in animal groups.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Behavioral traits that define social dominance are the same that reduce social influence in a consensus task.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Diana PitaDepartment of Biological Sciences, Purdue University , West Lafayette, IN , USA.
Bret A MooreDepartment of Biological Sciences, Purdue University , West Lafayette, IN , USA.
Luke P TyrrellDepartment of Biological Sciences, Purdue University , West Lafayette, IN , USA.
Esteban Fernández-JuricicDepartment of Biological Sciences, Purdue University , West Lafayette, IN , USA.
Purdue University West Lafayette · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many species of fish rely on their visual systems to interact with conspecifics and these interactions can lead to collective behavior. Individual-based models have been used to predict collective interactions; however, these models generally make simplistic assumptions about the sensory systems that are applied without proper empirical testing to different species. This could limit our ability to predict (and test empirically) collective behavior in species with very different sensory requirements. In this study, we characterized components of the visual system in two species of cyprinid fish known to engage in visually dependent collective interactions (zebrafish Danio rerio and golden shiner Notemigonus crysoleucas) and derived quantitative predictions about the positioning of individuals within schools. We found that both species had relatively narrow binocular and blind fields and wide visual coverage. However, golden shiners had more visual coverage in the vertical plane (binocular field extending behind the head) and higher visual acuity than zebrafish. The centers of acute vision (areae) of both species projected in the fronto-dorsal region of the visual field, but those of the zebrafish projected more dorsally than those of the golden shiner. Based on this visual sensory information, we predicted that: (a) predator detection time could be increased by >1,000% in zebrafish and >100% in golden shiners with an increase in nearest neighbor distance, (b) zebrafish schools would have a higher roughness value (surface area/volume ratio) than those of golden shiners, (c) and that nearest neighbor distance would vary from 8 to 20 cm to visually resolve conspecific striping patterns in both species. Overall, considering between-species differences in the sensory system of species exhibiting collective behavior could change the predictions about the positioning of individuals in the group as well as the shape of the school, which can have implications for group cohesion. We suggest that more effort should be invested in assessing the role of the sensory system in shaping local interactions driving collective behavior.

Indexed as

Collective behaviorGolden shinerVisionVisual acuityZebrafish

Identifiers

PMID26290783
PMCPMC4540049
OpenAlexW1831768109

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.