ArticleOecologia2020
Adaptive significance of light and food for a kleptoplastic sea slug: implications for photosynthesis.
Article in Oecologia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term functional kleptoplasty in benthic foraminifera.iScience · 2025Article
- Food shaped photosynthesis: Photophysiology of the sea slugOpen research Europe · 2023Article
- Kleptoplasty: Getting away with stolen chloroplasts.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Ultraviolet screening by slug tissue and tight packing of plastids protect photosynthetic sea slugs from photoinhibition.Photosynthesis research · 2022Article
- Photosynthesis from stolen chloroplasts can support sea slug reproductive fitness.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sacoglossan sea slugs can 'steal' chloroplasts from their algal food and use them for photosynthesis (kleptoplasty). Although it has been shown that light has positive effects on survival and body size retention of some sacoglossans likely through photosynthesis, it is unknown whether light affects their fitness components such as number of offspring or offspring size. Moreover, whether the effects of light extend over the sacoglossans' lifetime has been unexplored. To assess such long-term effects of light intensity and food availability on fitness components, we conducted a 15.9-week laboratory experiment using Elysia atroviridis under a combination of two light intensities (low or high) and two food conditions (with or without food). The total number of eggs laid was greater in the presence of both strong light and food than in other conditions, suggesting positive effects of both light intensity and food availability. The shell height at hatch was also largest in the presence of strong light and food. Larval rearing experiments showed that the size difference at hatch between conditions corresponded to a 1.19-1.93 days growth and 7.9-18.1% survival increase. Thus, positive effects of light and food on the fitness components extend over the lifetime of E. atroviridis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33064215What 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.