ArticlePeerJ2023
Comparative ultrastructure of the antennae and sensory hairs in six species of crayfish.
Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The coding mitochondrial genome of crayfishMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Antennae in crayfish are essential for gaining information about the local topography and localising food, chemicals, conspecifics or predator. There are still gaps in the research on the morphology of antennae in decapods compared to other arthropods. Methodology: Biometrical and ultrastructural methods were applied using light and cryo-scanning electron microscopies to study the morphology of antennae in six different crayfish species, including marbled crayfish Results: Significant differences in the antenna length, length and width of each segment to carapace length ratios, and the number of segments were found in the six crayfish species. The ultrastructure revealed differences in the distribution of sensory hairs on the antenna and the morphology of the antennal surface. Conclusions: The different morphology of antennae might reflect adaptation to the conditions of their specific habitats. In addition, results showed that a combination of differences in the morphological features and biometrical measurements of antennae could be used for the distinguishment of different studied crayfish species.
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.