Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27853558›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2016

Strain differences in the collective behaviour of zebrafish (

Axel Séguret, Bertrand Collignon, José Halloy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. A multi-scale review of the dynamics of collective behaviour: from rapid responses to ontogeny and evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

3 authors.

Axel SéguretUniversity Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité , LIED, UMR 8236, 75013, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5926-7533
Bertrand CollignonUniversity Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité , LIED, UMR 8236, 75013, Paris, France.
José HalloyUniversity Paris Diderot, Sorbonne Paris Cité , LIED, UMR 8236, 75013, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1555-2484

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies show differences in individual motion and shoaling tendency between strains of the same species. Here, we analyse collective motion and response to visual stimuli in two morphologically different strains (TL and AB) of zebrafish. For both strains, we observed 10 groups of 5 and 10 zebrafish swimming freely in a large experimental tank with two identical landmarks (cylinders or discs) for 1 h. We tracked the positions of the fish by an automated tracking method and compute several metrics at the group level. First, the probability of the presence shows that both strains avoid free space and are more likely to swim in the vicinity of the walls of the tank and the landmarks. Second, the analysis of landmarks occupancy shows that AB zebrafish are more present in their vicinity than TL ones and that both strains regularly transit from one to the other one with no preference on the long duration. Finally, TL zebrafish show a higher cohesion than AB zebrafish. Thus, environmental heterogeneity and duration of the trials allow to reveal individual and collective behavioural variabilities among different strains of zebrafish. These results provide a new insight into the need to take into account individual variability of zebrafish strains for studying collective behaviour.

Indexed as

collective behaviourdecision-makingphenotypeszebrafish

Identifiers

PMID27853558
PMCPMC5098983

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.