ArticleFish physiology and biochemistry2016
Dim-light photoreceptor of chub mackerel Scomber japonicus and the photoresponse upon illumination with LEDs of different wavelengths.
Article in Fish physiology and biochemistry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spectral sensitivity and photoresponse in the rock bream Oplegnathus fasciatus and their relationships with the absorption maximum of the photoreceptor.Fish physiology and biochemistry · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To study the absorption characteristics of rhodopsin, a dim-light photoreceptor, in chub mackerel (Scomber japonicus) and the relationship between light wavelengths on the photoresponse, the rod opsin gene was cloned into an expression vector, pMT4. Recombinant opsin was transiently expressed in COS-1 cells and reconstituted with 11-cis-retinal. Cells containing the regenerated rhodopsin were solubilized and subjected to UV/Vis spectroscopic analysis in the dark and upon illumination. Difference spectra from the lysates indicated an absorption maximum of mackerel rhodopsin around 500 nm. Four types of light-emitting diode (LED) modules with different wavelengths (red, peak 627 nm; cyan, 505 nm; blue, 442 nm; white, 447 + 560 nm) were constructed to examine their effects on the photoresponse in chub mackerel. Behavioral responses of the mackerels, including speed and frequencies acclimated in the dark and upon LED illumination, were analyzed using an underwater acoustic camera. Compared to an average speed of 22.25 ± 1.57 cm/s of mackerel movement in the dark, speed increased to 22.97 ± 0.29, 24.66 ± 1.06, 26.28 ± 2.28, and 25.19 ± 1.91 cm/s upon exposure to red, blue, cyan, and white LEDs, respectively. There were increases of 103.48 ± 1.58, 109.37 ± 5.29, 118.48 ± 10.82, and 109.43 ± 3.92 %, respectively, in the relative speed of the fishes upon illumination with red, blue, cyan, and white LEDs compared with that in the dark (set at 100 %). Similar rate of wavelength-dependent responses was observed in a frequency analysis. These results indicate that an LED emitting a peak wavelength close to an absorption maximum of rhodopsin is more effective at eliciting a response to light.
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.