ArticlePeerJ2015
Grunt variation in the oyster toadfish Opsanus tau: effect of size and sex.
Article in PeerJ, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ontogenetic shifts in sound production and shared sonic mechanisms in two priacanthid fishes.PeerJ · 2026Article
- Article
- Listening forward: approaching marine biodiversity assessments using acoustic methods.Royal Society open science · 2020Review
- Sound production in femaleBioacoustics · 2020Article
- Simultaneous production of two kinds of sounds in relation with sonic mechanism in the boxfish Ostracion meleagris and O. cubicus.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Testing ontogenetic patterns of sexual size dimorphism against expectations of the expensive tissue hypothesis, an intraspecific example using oyster toadfish (Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- Oyster toadfish (Opsanus tau) boatwhistle call detection and patterns within a large-scale oyster restoration site.PloS one · 2017Article
- Wall structure and material properties cause viscous damping of swimbladder sounds in the oyster toadfish Opsanus tau.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As in insects, frogs and birds, vocal activity in fishes tends to be more developed in males than in females, and sonic swimbladder muscles may be sexually dimorphic, i.e., either larger in males or present only in males. Male oyster toadfish Opsanus tau L produce a long duration, tonal boatwhistle advertisement call, and both sexes grunt, a short duration more pulsatile agonistic call. Sonic muscles are present in both sexes but larger in males. We tested the hypothesis that males would call more than females by inducing grunts in toadfish of various sizes held in a net and determined incidence of calling and developmental changes in grunt parameters. A small number of fish were recorded twice to examine call repeatability. Both sexes were equally likely to grunt, and grunt parameters (sound pressure level (SPL), individual range in SPL, number of grunts, and fundamental frequency) were similar in both sexes. SPL increased with fish size before leveling off in fish >200 g, and fundamental frequency and other parameters did not change with fish size. Number of grunts in a train, grunt duration and inter-grunt interval were highly variable in fish recorded twice suggesting that grunt parameters reflect internal motivation rather than different messages. Grunt production may explain the presence of well-developed sonic muscles in females and suggests that females have an active but unexplored vocal life.
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.