Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28403149›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

A protocol for identifying suitable biomarkers to assess fish health: A systematic review.

Frederieke Kroon, Claire Streten, Simon Harries

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Characterizing the Health Status of European Hake (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Dietary Protein Hydrolysate FromAquaculture nutrition · 2025
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Frontiers in systems biology · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Frederieke KroonAustralian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8771-6543
Claire StretenAustralian Institute of Marine Science, Arafura Timor Research Facility, Brinkin, Northern Territory, Australia.
Simon HarriesAustralian Institute of Marine Science, Arafura Timor Research Facility, Brinkin, Northern Territory, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBiomarkers have been used extensively to provide the connection between external levels of contaminant exposure, internal levels of tissue contamination, and early adverse effects in organisms.

objectivesTo present a three-step protocol for identifying suitable biomarkers to assess fish health in coastal and marine ecosystems, using Gladstone Harbour (Australia) as a case study.

methodsPrior to applying our protocol, clear working definitions for biomarkers were developed to ensure consistency with the global literature on fish health assessment. First, contaminants of concern were identified based on the presence of point and diffuse sources of pollution and available monitoring data for the ecosystem of interest. Second, suitable fish species were identified using fisheries dependent and independent data, and prioritised based on potential pathways of exposure to the contaminants of concern. Finally, a systematic and critical literature review was conducted on the use of biomarkers to assess the health of fish exposed to the contaminants of concern. RESULTS/DISCUSSION: We present clear working definitions for bioaccumulation markers, biomarkers of exposure, biomarkers of effect and biomarkers of susceptibility. Based on emission and concentration information, seven metals were identified as contaminants of concern for Gladstone Harbour. Twenty out of 232 fish species were abundant enough to be potentially suitable for biomarker studies; five of these were prioritised based on potential pathways of exposure and susceptibility to metals. The literature search on biomarkers yielded 5,035 articles, of which 151met the inclusion criteria. Based on our review, the most suitable biomarkers include bioaccumulation markers, biomarkers of exposure (CYP1A, EROD, SOD, LPOX, HSP, MT, DNA strand breaks, micronuclei, apoptosis), and biomarkers of effect (histopathology, TAG:ST).

conclusionOur protocol outlines a clear pathway to identify suitable biomarkers to assess fish health in coastal and marine ecosystems, which can be applied to biomarker studies in aquatic ecosystems around the world.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomarkersFish DiseasesFishesFish ProteinsOxidative StressSystematic Reviews as TopicWater Pollutants, ChemicalWater QualityBiomarkersFish ProteinsWater Pollutants, Chemical

Identifiers

PMID28403149
PMCPMC5389625

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.