ArticlePloS one2018
Anesthetic protocol for microinjection-related handling of Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii; Acipenseriformes) prolarvae.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular Characterization of Hemopexin in the Siberian Sturgeon (International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Superoxide Dismutase Multigene Family from a Primitive Chondrostean Sturgeon,Antioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An anesthetic protocol was optimized for microinjection-related handling of Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii; Acipenseriformes) prolarvae, an extant primitive fish species commonly grown in aquaculture. Comparative examinations of three selected anesthetics (clove oil, lidocaine, and MS-222) with a dosage regime of 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg/L indicated that MS-222 was the most efficient agent for Siberian sturgeon prolarvae, as evidenced by the fast induction of anesthesia with quick and uniform recovery. Meanwhile, clove oil should be avoided, due to prolonged recovery times varying widely between individuals. None of the tested anesthetics significantly affected prolarval viability at any of the dosage regimes tested in this study. Based on an analysis of the duration of an unconscious state in air, we recommend a dose of 200 mg/L MS-222 for microinjection. Recovery time after use of this dose was influenced by the prolarval age and the development of gills, in which prolarvae older than 3 days after hatching required longer recovery times than did younger prolarvae. Post-recovery behavioral assessment showed no apparent difference between MS-222-anesthetized and non-anesthetized prolarvae in their swimming behavior and phototactic responses. Applicability of currently developed anesthetic protocol using MS-222 in larval microinjection was demonstrated with the injection of a visible dye to the anesthetized prolarvae, followed by the analysis of post-recovery viability. Taken together, the present anesthetic protocol based on 200 mg/L of MS-222 could provide researchers with practical usefulness with good safety margins for the micromanipulation and other related handlings of Siberian sturgeon prolarvae.
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.