Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33439470›Full record

SynthesisLearning & behavior2021

Learning in Cnidaria: A systematic review.

Ken Cheng

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Learning & behavior, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
13.9field-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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Sea anemones (Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Transitions in cognitive evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Associative learning in the cnidarianProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  11. Learning in Cnidaria: a summary.Communicative & integrative biology · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ken ChengDepartment of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, 2109, Australia. ken.cheng@mq.edu.au.
Macquarie University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Using the database Web of Science, a systematic search for literature on learning in Cnidaria, both non-associative and associative, was conducted. Cnidaria comprise hydras, box jellies, (true) jellyfish, corals, and sea anemones, a group of animals possessing diffuse networks of nerves known as nerve nets or neural nets. Being neighbors on the animal evolutionary tree to bilaterian animals, the vast collection of (mostly) bilaterally symmetric animals with brains ranging from tiny worms to giant whales, the cognitive capacities of Cnidaria inform the evolution of nervous systems and cognition in bilateria. I failed to find literature on learning in corals and box jellies. Habituation has been amply shown in hydras, jellyfish, and sea anemones, while sensitization has been studied in detail in sea anemones, including some neurobiological details in the release of nematocysts or poisoned darts for capturing prey. One well-controlled study found evidence for classical conditioning with shock in sea anemones, in addition to two other lesser-controlled demonstrations. The relevance of associative learning in sea anemones, embodied cognition, and representationsal issues when it comes to animals without central brains is discussed.

Indexed as

Sea AnemonesAnimalsConditioning, ClassicalClassical conditioningHabituationHydraJellyfishSea anemonesSensitization

Identifiers

PMID33439470
OpenAlexW3118428523

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.