Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36330029›Full record

ArticleZoological studies2022

Anatomy and Histology of the Eye of the Nutria

Taeko Miyazaki, Yukako Naritsuka, Michihiro Yagami, Shuji Kobayashi, Koichi Kawamura

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Zoological studies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Taeko MiyazakiDepartment of Marine Bioresources, Graduate School of Bioresources, Mie University, 1577 Kurimamachiya-cho, Tsu, Mie 514-8507, Japan. E-mail: taeko@bio.mie-u.ac.jp (Miyazaki); elyehy@gmail.com (Naritsuka); kawa-k@bio.mie-u.ac.jp (Kawamura).
Yukako NaritsukaDepartment of Marine Bioresources, Graduate School of Bioresources, Mie University, 1577 Kurimamachiya-cho, Tsu, Mie 514-8507, Japan. E-mail: taeko@bio.mie-u.ac.jp (Miyazaki); elyehy@gmail.com (Naritsuka); kawa-k@bio.mie-u.ac.jp (Kawamura).
Michihiro YagamiDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Okayama University of Science, Ridai-cho 1-1, Kita-ku, Okayama 700-0005, Japan. E-mail: s21zm04ts@ous.jp (Yagami); skobaya@zool.ous.ac.jp (Kobayashi).
Shuji KobayashiDepartment of Zoology, Faculty of Science, Okayama University of Science, Ridai-cho 1-1, Kita-ku, Okayama 700-0005, Japan. E-mail: s21zm04ts@ous.jp (Yagami); skobaya@zool.ous.ac.jp (Kobayashi).
Koichi KawamuraDepartment of Marine Bioresources, Graduate School of Bioresources, Mie University, 1577 Kurimamachiya-cho, Tsu, Mie 514-8507, Japan. E-mail: taeko@bio.mie-u.ac.jp (Miyazaki); elyehy@gmail.com (Naritsuka); kawa-k@bio.mie-u.ac.jp (Kawamura).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The nutria is a large, semi-aquatic rodent that, being invasive, is having a growing impact on the ecosystem in western Japan. Knowledge regarding physical adaptations to the nutria's lifestyle and habitual activities would be useful for effectively controlling and preventing their spread. Nutrias spend time on land and in water, feeding on agricultural crops and wild grasses growing near the waterside, as well as aquatic plants and shellfish. In the current study, the nutria's visual organ was analyzed anatomically and histologically, and aquatic and light environmental adaptations were evaluated. The results revealed that the nutria eyeball was almost spherical, and the cornea was rounded. The lens was convex and slightly thicker than previously reported for other rodents. These features were not characteristic of aquatic adaptations observed in the eyes of fish or marine mammals. The ratio of lens diameter to eyeball diameter was 0.6, similar to that of nocturnal species. The pupil was a vertical slit, suggesting an ability to adjust the amount of light entering the eyeball during twilight. Photoreceptors were sparsely distributed across the whole retina, and no fovea was observed. Retinal thickness was 90-100 μm, thinner than that in other rodent species. Visual acuity was 1.44-1.58 cycles/degree, higher than that in other rodents, likely because of the nutria's large eyeball and body. These results suggest that the nutria visual system is adapted to recognize large shadows of distant predators rather than viewing objects in detail.

Indexed as

Eyeball shapeNutriaPupil shapeRetinal histologyVisual acuity

Identifiers

PMID36330029
PMCPMC9579949

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.