Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37130145›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Using ecosystem health and welfare assessments to determine impacts of wild collection for public aquariums.

Brittany Fischer, Jessica Pempek, Kelly Ann George, Jaylene Flint, Thomas Wittum, Mark Flint

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Invisible Invertebrates: The Welfare of Invertebrates in Public Aquaria.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  2. 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

6 authors.

Brittany FischerDepartment of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2188-2917
Jessica PempekDepartment of Animal Sciences, College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Kelly Ann GeorgeDepartment of Animal Sciences, College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Jaylene FlintDepartment of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.
Thomas WittumDepartment of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9216-1308
Mark FlintDepartment of Veterinary Preventive Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aquatic ecosystems are currently facing a multitude of stressors from anthropogenic impacts, including climate change, pollution, and overfishing. Public aquariums positively contribute to ecosystems through conservation, education, and scientific advancement; but may also negatively detract from these systems through collection of animals from the wild and sourcing from commercial suppliers. Changes within the industry have occurred, although evidence-based assessments of 1) how aquariums collect and maintain their populations to determine sustainability of the environment they have harvested; and 2) the welfare of these harvested animals once within the aquariums are still needed. The objectives of this study were to assess the ecosystem health of locations aquariums frequently visit to collect fish from the wild, and then evaluate the wellbeing of fishes at aquariums after extended periods in captivity. Assessments included use of chemical, physical, and biological indicators at field sites, and use of a quantitative welfare assessment at aquariums for comparison to species reared through aquaculture. Anthropogenic pressures at field sites were observed, but no evidence of high degradation or compromised health of animals were found. Welfare assessments of aquarium exhibit tanks produced high-positive scores overall (> 70/84), demonstrating that both wild collected (avg. score 78.8) and aquaculture fishes (avg. score 74.5) were coping appropriately within their environments. Although findings indicated that fish can be taken from the wild at low-moderate rates without any deleterious impact on the environment and cope equally well in aquarium settings, alternatives such as aquaculture should be considered as a strategy to reduce pressure on known stressed aquatic environments or where significant numbers of fishes are being taken.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemAnimalsAquacultureFisheriesFishes

Identifiers

PMID37130145
PMCPMC10153729

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.