Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29148042›Full record

ArticleJournal of anatomy2018

Comparative anatomy of zebrafish paired and median fin muscles: basis for functional, developmental, and macroevolutionary studies.

Natalia Siomava, Rui Diogo

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of anatomy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
15.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Light diffraction by sarcomeres produces iridescence in transmission in the transparent ghost catfish.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Natalia SiomavaDepartment of Anatomy, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5472-7078
Rui DiogoDepartment of Anatomy, Howard University College of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA.
Howard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the last decades, Danio rerio became one of the most used model organisms in various evo-devo studies devoted to the fin skeletal anatomy and fin-limb transition. Surprisingly, there is not even a single paper about the detailed anatomy of the adult muscles of the five fin types of this species. To facilitate more integrative developmental, functional, genetic, and evolutionary studies of the appendicular musculoskeletal system of the zebrafish and to provide a basis for further comparisons with other fishes and tetrapods, we describe here the identity, overall configuration, and attachments of appendicular muscles in a way that can be easily understood and implemented by non-anatomist researchers. We show that the muscle pattern of the caudal fin is very different from patterns seen in other fins but is very consistent within teleosts. Our observations support the idea of the developmental and evolutionary distinction of the caudal fin and point out that the musculature of the adult zebrafish pectoral and pelvic fins is in general very similar. Both paired fins have superficial and deep layers of abductors and adductors going to all/most rays plus the dorsal and ventral arrectors going only to the first ray. Nevertheless, we noted three major differences between the pelvic and pectoral fins of adult zebrafishes: (i) the pectoral girdle lacks a retractor muscle, which is present in the pelvic girdle - the retractor ischii; (ii) the protractor of the pelvic girdle is an appendicular/trunk muscle, while that of the pectoral girdle is a branchiomeric muscle; (iii) the first ray of the pectoral fin is moved by an additional arrector-3. The anal and dorsal fins consist of serially repeated units, each of which comprises one half-ray and three appendicular muscles (one erector, depressor, and inclinator) on each side of the body. The outermost rays are attachment points for the longitudinal protractor and retractor. Based on our results, we discuss whether the pectoral appendage might evolutionarily be closer to the head than to the pelvic appendage and whether the pelvic appendage might have been derived from the trunk/median fins. We discuss a hypothesis of paired fin origin that is a hybrid of the fin-fold and Gegenbaur's theories. Lastly, our data indicate that D. rerio is indeed an appropriate model organism for the appendicular musculature of teleosts in particular and, at least in the case of the paired fins, also of actinopterygians as a whole.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAnatomy, ComparativeAnimal FinsAnimalsMuscle, SkeletalZebrafishactinopterygiansappendicular musclescomparative anatomyfishesmedian finspaired finsteleostszebrafish

Identifiers

PMID29148042
PMCPMC5770327
OpenAlexW2768683728

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.