Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29787611›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Evaluation of anaesthetic protocols for laboratory adult zebrafish (Danio rerio).

Tânia Martins, Enoque Diniz, Luís M Félix, Luís Antunes

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Apex Resection in Zebrafish (International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Article
  16. Identification of Individual Zebrafish (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tânia MartinsCentre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences (CITAB), University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), Vila Real, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-1546-0144
Enoque DinizCentre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences (CITAB), University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), Vila Real, Portugal.
Luís M FélixCentre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences (CITAB), University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), Vila Real, Portugal.
Luís AntunesCentre for the Research and Technology of Agro-Environmental and Biological Sciences (CITAB), University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro (UTAD), Vila Real, Portugal.
University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In the last decades, the use of zebrafish (Danio rerio) in biomedical research has increased. Anaesthesia is daily used in fish during experimental procedures to avoid discomfort, stress or pain. Also, fish welfare and the reliability of results can be compromised if an unsuitable anaesthetic protocol is used. Therefore, we aimed to refine anaesthetic protocols to be used in adult zebrafish by evaluating the efficacy of different anaesthetics, used alone or in combination. For that, zebrafish were randomly assigned to 8 different groups: 100 μg/mLMS-222 (MS); 0.2 μg/mL etomidate (E); 0.2 μg/mL etomidate + 100 μg/mL lidocaine (E+L); 1.25 μg/mL propofol (P); 1.25 μg/mL propofol + 100 μg/mL lidocaine (P+L); 100 μg/mL ketamine (K); 100 μg/mL ketamine + 1.25 μg/mL medetomidine (K+M); and 100 μg/mL ketamine + 1.25 μg/mL medetomidine/3.125 μg/mL atipamezole (K+M/A). The animals were placed in an anaesthetic water bath, then, the following parameters were registered: time for equilibrium loss and anaesthesia induction, loss of sensitivity to soft and painful stimuli, respiratory rate, recovery time, and activity after recovery. The combined forms of E+L, P+L and K+M were the fastest to induce a surgical anaesthetic stage. Nevertheless, E+L induced respiratory depression, while K+M was shown to have the longer recovery time compared to MS-222, even when atipamezole was added. In conclusion, the P+L combination was shown to provide good anaesthesia with analgesia, without causing a major respiratory depression, providing as well a quick recovery, similar to MS-222.

Indexed as

LaboratoriesZebrafishAnestheticsAnimalsDose-Response Relationship, DrugFemaleMaleAnesthetics

Identifiers

PMID29787611
PMCPMC5963751
OpenAlexW2804344893

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.