Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35146416›Full record

ReviewToxicon: X2022

Implications of bleaching on cnidarian venom ecology.

K L Kaposi, R L Courtney, J E Seymour

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxicon: X, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

K L KaposiCollege of Public Health, Medicine and Veterinary Science, Australia.
R L CourtneyAustralian Institute for Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, 1/14-88 McGregor Road, Smithfield, QLD, 4878, Australia.
J E SeymourAustralian Institute for Tropical Health and Medicine, James Cook University, 1/14-88 McGregor Road, Smithfield, QLD, 4878, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cnidarian bleaching research often focuses on the effects on a cnidarian's physiological health and fitness, whilst little focus has been towards the impacts of these events on their venom ecology. Given the importance of a cnidarian's venom to their survival and the increasing threat of bleaching events, it is important to understand the effects that this threat may have on this important aspect of their ecology as it may have unforeseen impacts on their ability to catch prey and defend themselves. This review aims to explore evidence that suggests that bleaching may impact on each of the key aspects of a cnidarians' venom ecology: cnidae, venom composition, and venom toxicity. Additionally, the resulting energy deficit, compensatory heterotrophic feeding, and increased defensive measures have been highlighted as possible ecological factors driving these changes. Suggestions are also made to guide the success of research in this field into the future, specifically in regards to selecting a study organism, the importance of accurate symbiont and cnidae identification, use of appropriate bleaching methods, determination of bleaching, and animal handling. Ultimately, this review highlights a significant and important gap in our knowledge into how cnidarians are, and will, continue to be impacted by bleaching stress.

Indexed as

Energy budgetNematocystPhysiologyStressSymbiosis

Identifiers

PMID35146416
PMCPMC8819380

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.