Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37040808›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2023

A power amplification dyad in seahorses.

Corrine Avidan, Steven W Day, Roi Holzman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. A mechanical perspective on suction feeding in fishes.The Journal of experimental biology · 2025
    Review
  3. A power amplification dyad in seahorses.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. 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.

Corrine AvidanDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Organismal Biology, Brown University, Providence, RI 02912, USA.
Steven W DayRochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY 14623, USA.
Roi HolzmanSchool of Zoology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-2334-2551

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Throughout evolution, organisms repeatedly developed elastic elements to power explosive body motions, overcoming ubiquitous limits on the power capacity of fast-contracting muscles. Seahorses evolved such a latch-mediated spring-actuated (LaMSA) mechanism; however, it is unclear how this mechanism powers the two complementary functions necessary for feeding: rapidly swinging the head towards the prey, and sucking water into the mouth to entrain it. Here, we combine flow visualization and hydrodynamic modelling to estimate the net power required for accelerating the suction feeding flows in 13 fish species. We show that the mass-specific power of suction feeding in seahorses is approximately three times higher than the maximum recorded from any vertebrate muscle, resulting in suction flows that are approximately eight times faster than similar-sized fishes. Using material testing, we reveal that the rapid contraction of the sternohyoideus tendons can release approximately 72% of the power needed to accelerate the water into the mouth. We conclude that the LaMSA system in seahorses is powered by two elastic elements, the sternohyoideus and epaxial tendons. These elements jointly actuate the coordinated acceleration of the head and the fluid in front of the mouth. These findings extend the known function, capacity and design of LaMSA systems.

Indexed as

SmegmamorphaAnimalsBiomechanical PhenomenaFeeding BehaviorFishesMuscleselastic energy storageLaMSAmuscle powerseahorsesuction feedingsyngnathidae

Identifiers

PMID37040808
PMCPMC10089724

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.