ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2021
Can feeding sound attract flower fish (Ptychobarbus kaznakovi)?
Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of acoustic attractants may have the potential to guide native migratory species towards safe passage. Flower fish Ptychobarbus kaznakovi, a short-distance migratory fish whose population is in decline in the past decades, was exposed to three acoustic stimuli (feeding sound, ambient riverine noise and the pure tone 1000 Hz) to examine the phonotaxic responses using playbacks approaches in a fibreglass tank. The results showed that the flower fish showed significantly greater positive phonotaxis and swam towards the sound sources significantly faster in response to the feeding sounds than to ambient riverine noise and the pure tone during the 5-min exposure. Distribution experiments were conducted to study the preference of flower fish to the three sounds stimuli. The results showed that the experimental fish in feeding sound trials spent significant more time in areas closer to the sound sources than that in the pure tone and the ambient riverine noise trials, respectively. This study indicates that the feeding sounds may serve as potential acoustic attractants to guide flower fish to safe passage routes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
34165600What 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.