Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33742061›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

High turbidity levels alter coral reef fish movement in a foraging task.

Cait Newport, Oliver Padget, Theresa Burt de Perera

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

3 authors.

Cait NewportDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Zoology Research and Administration Building, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3SZ, UK. caitlin.newport@zoo.ox.ac.uk.
Oliver PadgetDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Zoology Research and Administration Building, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3SZ, UK.
Theresa Burt de PereraDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, Zoology Research and Administration Building, Mansfield Road, Oxford, OX1 3SZ, UK.

Funding

Horizon 2020 659684Human Frontier Science Program Ref.-No: RGP0016/2019Leverhulme Trust ECF-2019-188St. John's College, University of Oxford Junior Research Fellowship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sensory systems allow animals to detect and respond to stimuli in their environment and underlie all behaviour. However, human induced pollution is increasingly interfering with the functioning of these systems. Increased suspended sediment, or turbidity, in aquatic habitats reduces the reactive distance to visual signals and may therefore alter movement behaviour. Using a foraging task in which fish (Rhinecanthus aculeatus) had to find six food sites in an aquarium, we tested the impact of high turbidity (40-68 NTU; 154 mg/L) on foraging efficiency using a detailed and novel analysis of individual movements. High turbidity led to a significant decrease in task efficacy as fish took longer to begin searching and find food, and they travelled further whilst searching. Trajectory analyses revealed that routes were less efficient and that fish in high turbidity conditions were more likely to cover the same ground and search at a slower speed. These results were observed despite the experimental protocol allowing for the use of alternate sensory systems (e.g. olfaction, lateral line). Given that movement underlies fundamental behaviours including foraging, mating, and predator avoidance, a reduction in movement efficiency is likely to have a significant impact on the health and population dynamics of visually-guided fish species.

Indexed as

Coral ReefsWater MovementsAnimalsBehavior, AnimalComputer SimulationFishesMovement

Identifiers

PMID33742061
PMCPMC7979735

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.