ArticleZebrafish2016
In Vivo Determination of Body Composition in Zebrafish (Danio rerio) by Quantitative Magnetic Resonance.
Article in Zebrafish, 2016. 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Methodological advancements in organ-specific ectopic lipid quantitative characterization: Effects of high fat diet on muscle and liver intracellular lipids.Molecular metabolism · 2023Article
- Morphometric parameters predict body fat proportions in common hamsters.Journal of mammalogy · 2022Article
- Article
- Genetic and Genomic Advances in Developmental Models: Applications for Nutrition Research.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020Review
- Both Dietary Ratio of n-6 to n-3 Fatty Acids and Total Dietary Lipid Are Positively Associated with Adiposity and Reproductive Health in Zebrafish.Current developments in nutrition · 2020Article
- Influence of Commercial and Laboratory Diets on Growth, Body Composition, and Reproduction in the ZebrafishZebrafish · 2019Article
- Dietary methionine restriction: Effects on glucose tolerance, lipid content and micro-RNA composition in the muscle of rainbow trout.Comparative biochemistry and physiology. Toxicology & pharmacology : CBP · 2018Article
- Validation of Body Condition Indices and Quantitative Magnetic Resonance in Estimating Body Composition in a Small Lizard.Journal of experimental zoology. Part A, Ecological genetics and physiology · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Zebrafish (Danio rerio) as a model research organism continues to expand its relevance and role in multiple research disciplines, with recent work directed toward models of metabolism, nutrition, and energetics. Multiple technologies exist to assess body composition in animal research models at various levels of detail (tissues/organs, body regions, and whole organism). The development and/or validation of body composition assessment tools can open new areas of research questions for a given organism. Using fish from a comparative nutrition study, quantitative magnetic resonance (QMR) assessment of whole body fat and fat-free mass (FFM) in live fish was performed. QMR measures from two cohorts (n = 26 and n = 27) were compared with chemical carcass analysis (CCA) of FM and FFM. QMR was significantly correlated with chemical carcass values (fat, p < 0.001; lean, p = 0.002), although QMR significantly overestimated fat mass (FM) (0.011 g; p < 0.0001) and underestimated FFM (-0.024 g; p < 0.0001) relative to CCA. In a separate cross-validation group of fish, prediction equations corrected carcass values for FM (p = 0.121) and FFM (p = 0.753). These results support the utilization of QMR-a nonlethal nondestructive method-for cross-sectional or longitudinal body composition assessment outcomes in zebrafish.
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.