Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36467695›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in physiology2022

The significance of cephalopod beaks as a research tool: An update.

José C Xavier, Alexey V Golikov, José P Queirós, Catalina Perales-Raya, Rigoberto Rosas-Luis, José Abreu, Giambattista Bello, Paco Bustamante, Juan C Capaz, Valerie H Dimkovikj and 26 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
13.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Age Estimation inAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Life History of the Arctic SquidAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

36 authors at 20 institutions in 12 countries.

José C XavierDepartment of Life Sciences, Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Alexey V GolikovGEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
José P QueirósDepartment of Life Sciences, Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Catalina Perales-RayaInstituto Español de Oceanografía (IEO,CSIC), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain.
Rigoberto Rosas-LuisCONACYT -Tecnológico Nacional de México/I. T., Chetumal, Quintana Roo, Mexico.
José AbreuDepartment of Life Sciences, Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Giambattista BelloMola di Bari, Italy.
Paco BustamanteLittoral Environnement et Sociétés (LIENSs), UMR 7266 CNRS-La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, France.
Juan C CapazCenter of Marine Sciences, University of Algarve, Campus de Gambelas, Faro, Portugal.
Valerie H DimkovikjDepartment of Marine Science, Coastal Carolina University, Conway, SC, United States.
Angel F GonzálezInstituto de Investigaciones Marinas (CSIC), Vigo, Spain.
Hugo GuímaroDepartment of Life Sciences, Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Airam Guerra-MarreroIU-ECOAQUA, University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Edf. Ciencias Básicas, Campus de Tafira, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Spain.
José N Gomes-PereiraAtlantic Naturalist Association, Horta, Portugal.
Jorge Hernández-UrceraInstituto de Investigaciones Marinas (CSIC), Vigo, Spain.
Tsunemi KuboderaNational Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo, Japan.
Vladimir LaptikhovskyCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (CEFAS), Lowestoft, United Kingdom.
Evgenia LefkaditouHCMR, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, Athens, Greece.
Fedor LishchenkoLaboratory for Ecology and Morphology of Marine Invertebrates, A.N. Severtsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia.
Amanda LunaDepartment of Ecology and Animal Biology, Faculty of Marine Sciences, University of Vigo, Vigo, Spain.
Bilin LiuCollege of Marine Sciences, Shanghai Ocean University, Shanghai, China.
Graham J PierceInstituto de Investigaciones Marinas (CSIC), Vigo, Spain.
Vasco PissarraMARE-Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, Laboratório Marítimo da Guia, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Cascais, Portugal.
Elodie ReveillacLittoral Environnement et Sociétés (LIENSs), UMR 7266 CNRS-La Rochelle Université, La Rochelle, France.
Evgeny V RomanovCentre Technique de Recherche et de Valorisation des Milieux Aquatiques (CITEB), Le Port, Île de la Réunion, France.
Rui RosaMARE-Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, Laboratório Marítimo da Guia, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Cascais, Portugal.
Marjorie RoscianCentre de Recherche en Paléontologie-Paris (CR2P), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Lisa Rose-MannUniversity of South Florida, College of Marine Science, St. Petersburg, FL, United States.
Isabelle RougetCentre de Recherche en Paléontologie-Paris (CR2P), CNRS, Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Pilar SánchezInstitut de Ciènces del Mar, CSIC, Psg. Marítim de la Barceloneta, Barcelona, Spain.
Antoni Sánchez-MárquezInstitut de Ciènces del Mar, CSIC, Psg. Marítim de la Barceloneta, Barcelona, Spain.
Sónia SeixasDepartment of Life Sciences, Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal.
Louise SouquetDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Science, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Jaquelino VarelaMARE-Marine and Environmental Sciences Centre/ARNET-Aquatic Research Network, Laboratório Marítimo da Guia, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Cascais, Portugal.
Erica A G VidalCenter for Marine Studies-Federal University of Parana (UFPR), Pontal do Paraná, PR, Brazil.
Yves CherelCentre d’Etudes Biologiques de Chizé, UMR 7372 du CNRS-La Rochelle Université, Villiers-en-Bois, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRBritish Antarctic Survey · GBInstituto de Investigacións Mariñas · ESUniversity of Lisbon · PTInstitut de Ciències del Mar · ESCentre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science · GBCoastal Carolina University · USFaculty (United Kingdom) · GBGEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel · DEHellenic Centre for Marine Research · GRInstituto Español de Oceanografía · ESNational Museum of Nature and Science · JPSevertsov Institute of Ecology and Evolution · RUShanghai Ocean University · CNStress Environnementaux et Biosurveillance des Milieux Aquatiques · FRTecnológico Nacional de México · MXUniversidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria · ESUniversidade Aberta · PTUniversidade de Vigo · ESUniversidade Federal do Paraná · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of cephalopod beaks in ecological and population dynamics studies has allowed major advances of our knowledge on the role of cephalopods in marine ecosystems in the last 60 years. Since the 1960's, with the pioneering research by Malcolm Clarke and colleagues, cephalopod beaks (also named jaws or mandibles) have been described to species level and their measurements have been shown to be related to cephalopod body size and mass, which permitted important information to be obtained on numerous biological and ecological aspects of cephalopods in marine ecosystems. In the last decade, a range of new techniques has been applied to cephalopod beaks, permitting new kinds of insight into cephalopod biology and ecology. The workshop on cephalopod beaks of the Cephalopod International Advisory Council Conference (Sesimbra, Portugal) in 2022 aimed to review the most recent scientific developments in this field and to identify future challenges, particularly in relation to taxonomy, age, growth, chemical composition (i.e., DNA, proteomics, stable isotopes, trace elements) and physical (i.e., structural) analyses. In terms of taxonomy, new techniques (e.g., 3D geometric morphometrics) for identifying cephalopods from their beaks are being developed with promising results, although the need for experts and reference collections of cephalopod beaks will continue. The use of beak microstructure for age and growth studies has been validated. Stable isotope analyses on beaks have proven to be an excellent technique to get valuable information on the ecology of cephalopods (namely habitat and trophic position). Trace element analyses is also possible using beaks, where concentrations are significantly lower than in other tissues (e.g., muscle, digestive gland, gills). Extracting DNA from beaks was only possible in one study so far. Protein analyses can also be made using cephalopod beaks. Future challenges in research using cephalopod beaks are also discussed.

Indexed as

beak taxonomy/composition/morphology/microstructure/paleontologycephalopod ecologycephalopod ecotoxicologycephalopod population dynamicscephalopod trophic dynamics

Identifiers

PMID36467695
PMCPMC9716703
OpenAlexW4309124427

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.