ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2016
Acquired versus innate prey capturing skills in super-precocial live-bearing fish.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Maternal food restriction during pregnancy affects offspring development and swimming performance in a placental live-bearing fish.The Journal of experimental biology · 2022Article
- Predation risk shapes the degree of placentation in natural populations of live-bearing fish.Ecology letters · 2020Article
- Maternal size and body condition predict the amount of post-fertilization maternal provisioning in matrotrophic fish.Ecology and evolution · 2018Article
- Hydrodynamic regime determines the feeding success of larval fish through the modulation of strike kinematics.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Live-bearing fish start hunting for mobile prey within hours after birth, an example of extreme precociality. Because prenatal, in utero, development of this behaviour is constrained by the lack of free-swimming sensory-motor interactions, immediate success after birth depends on innate, evolutionarily acquired patterns. Optimal performance however requires flexible adjustment to an unpredictable environment. To distinguish innate from postnatally developing patterns we analysed over 2000 prey capture events for 28 metallic livebearers (Girardinus metallicus; Poeciliidae), during their first 3 days after birth. We show that the use of synchronous pectoral fin beats for final acceleration and ingestion is fixed and presumably innate. It allows for direct, symmetrical control of swimming speed and direction, while avoiding head yaw. Eye movements and body curvatures, however, change considerably in the first few days, showing that eye-tail coordination requires postnatal development. The results show how successful prey captures for newborn, live-bearing fish are based on a combination of fixed motor programmes and rapid, postnatal development.
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.