Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37202429›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Applying appropriate frequency criteria to advance acoustic behavioural guidance systems for fish.

A Holgate, P R White, T G Leighton, P S Kemp

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. 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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

A HolgateInternational Centre for Ecohydraulics Research, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK. A.Holgate@soton.ac.uk.
P R WhiteInstitute of Sound and Vibration Research, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
T G LeightonInstitute of Sound and Vibration Research, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
P S KempInternational Centre for Ecohydraulics Research, Faculty of Engineering and Physical Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deterrents that use acoustics to guide fish away from dangerous areas depend on the elicitation of avoidance in the target species. Acoustic deterrents select the optimum frequency based on an assumption that highest avoidance is likely to occur at the greatest sensitivity. However, such an assumption may be unfounded. Using goldfish (Carassius auratus) as a suitable experimental model, this study tested this as a null hypothesis. Under laboratory conditions, the deterrence thresholds of individual goldfish exposed to 120 ms tones at six frequencies (250-2000 Hz) and four Sound Pressure Levels (SPL 115-145 dB) were quantified. The deterrence threshold defined as the SPL at which 25% of the tested population startled was calculated and compared to the hearing threshold obtained using Auditory Evoked Potential and particle acceleration threshold data. The optimum frequency to elicit a startle response was 250 Hz; different from the published hearing and particle acceleration sensitivities based on audiograms. The difference between the deterrence threshold and published hearing threshold data varied from 47.1 dB at 250 Hz to 76 dB at 600 Hz. This study demonstrates that information obtained from audiograms may poorly predict the most suitable frequencies at which avoidance behaviours are elicited in fish.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, AuditoryHearingAcousticsAcoustic StimulationAnimalsAuditory ThresholdFishes

Identifiers

PMID37202429
PMCPMC10195784

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.