ArticlePeerJ2018
Long-term experimental
Article in PeerJ, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Toward a green strategy of sponge mariculture and bioactive compounds recovery.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The chromosomal genome sequence of the spongeWellcome open research · 2025Article
- Purification of an Acidic Polysaccharide with Anticoagulant Activity from the Marine SpongeMarine drugs · 2024Article
- Microbiome changes through the ontogeny of the marine sponge Crambe crambe.Environmental microbiome · 2024Article
- Review
- Collagenic architecture and morphotraits in a marine basal metazoan as a model for bioinspired applied research.Journal of morphology · 2022Article
- Cultivation of fractionated cells from a bioactive-alkaloid-bearing marine sponge Axinella sp.In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe marine sponge
methodsExplants were cultured in four long-term experiments (19 and 31 months at ca. 2.5 m depth), to determine the suitability of new culture techniques by testing substrata and seeding time (season), and monitoring survival and growth. Explants were excised and grown in an experimental plant close to the wild donor sponge population. Percentage growth rate (GR%) was measured in terms of surface cover area, and explant survival was monitored
resultsExplant survival was high throughout the trial, ranging from 78.57% to 92.85% on travertine tiles and from 50% to 71.42% on oyster shells. A few instances of sponge regression were observed. Explant cover area correlated positively with season on two substrata, i.e., tiles and shells. The surface cover area and GR% of explants were measured in the starting phase and monitored up to the end of the trial. High GR% values were observed both on tiles (>21%) and on oyster shells (>15%). DISCUSSION: The data on the behaviour and life-style of cultured fragments, together with an increase >2,400% in cover area, demonstrate that
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.