ArticleBiology letters2022
Guppies (
Article in Biology letters, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Response to geometrical visual illusions in non-human animals: a meta-analysis.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Pooled it
- The visual challenges of short-range navigation in teleost fish.The Journal of experimental biology · 2026Review
- Circles of deception: the Ebbinghaus illusion from fish to birds.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Through an animal's eye: the implications of diverse sensory systems in scientific experimentation.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Review
- Guppies (Biology letters · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Animals travelling in their natural environment repeatedly encounter obstacles that they can either detour or go through. Gap negotiation requires an accurate estimation of the opening's size to avoid getting stuck or being injured. Research on visual illusions has revealed that in some circumstances, transformation rules used to generate a three-dimensional representation from bidimensional retinal images fail, leading to systematic errors in perception. In Ebbinghaus and Delboeuf illusions, the presence of task-irrelevant elements causes us to misjudge an object's size. Susceptibility to these illusions was observed in other animals, although with large intraspecific differences. In this study, we investigated whether fish can accurately estimate gap size and whether during this process they may be deceived by illusory patterns. Guppies were extremely accurate in gap negotiation, discriminating holes with a 10% diameter difference. When presented with two identical holes surrounded by inducers to produce Ebbinghaus and Delboeuf patterns, guppies misperceived gap size in the predicted direction. So far, researchers have principally considered illusions as useful tools for exploring the cognitive processing underlying vision. Our findings highlight the possibility that they have important ecological implications, affecting the everyday interactions of an animal with its physical world besides its intra- and interspecific relationships.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.