Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37386747›Full record

ArticleJournal of fish biology2023

Maze design: size and number of choices impact fish performance in cognitive assays.

Nick A R Jones, Daphne Cortese, Amelia Munson, Helen C Spence-Jones, Zoe Storm, Shaun S Killen, Ruth Bethel, Amy E Deacon, Mike M Webster, Libor Závorka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of fish biology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. A reinvestigation of cognitive styles in sticklebacks: decision success varies with behavioral type.Behavioral ecology : official journal of the International Society for Behavioral Ecology
    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

10 authors.

Nick A R JonesDepartment of Animal Physiology, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6031-7507
Daphne CorteseSchool of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Amelia MunsonSchool of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Helen C Spence-JonesAlfred-Wegener-Institut Helmholtz-Zentrum für Polar- und Meeresforschung, Wadden Sea Station Sylt, List, Germany.
Zoe StormSchool of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Shaun S KillenSchool of Biodiversity, One Health and Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Ruth BethelDepartment of Life Sciences, The University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago.
Amy E DeaconDepartment of Life Sciences, The University of the West Indies, St Augustine, Trinidad and Tobago.
Mike M WebsterCentre for Social Learning and Cognitive Evolution, School of Biology, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9597-6871
Libor ZávorkaWasserCluster Lunz - Biologische Station, Inter-university Centre for Aquatic Ecosystem Research, Lunz am See, Austria.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund P35515-BNatural Environment Research Council NE/T008334/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although studies on fish cognition are increasing, consideration of how methodological details influence the ability to detect and measure performance is lagging. Here, in two separate experiments the authors compared latency to leave the start position, latency to make a decision, levels of participation and success rates (whether fish entered the rewarded chamber as first choice) across different physical designs. Experiments compared fish performance across (a) two sizes of T-mazes, large and standard, and a plus-maze, and (b) open choice arenas with either two or four doors. Fish in T-mazes with longer arms took longer to leave the start chamber and were less likely to participate in a trial than fish in T-mazes with shorter arms. The number of options, or complexity, in a maze significantly impacted success but did not necessarily impact behavioural measures, and did not impact the number of fish that reached a chamber. Fish in the plus-maze had similar latencies to leave the start box and time to reach any chamber as fish in the same-sized T-maze but exhibited lower overall success. Similarly, in an open choice arena, increasing the number of options - doors to potential reward chambers - resulted in lower probability of success. There was an influence of reward position in the choice arena, with rewarded chambers closest to the sides of the arena resulting in lower latencies to enter and higher probability of decision success. Together the results allow the authors to offer practical suggestions towards optimal maze design for studies of fish cognition.

Indexed as

CognitionFishesAnimalsMaze Learningchoice arenacognitionfishminnowsplus-mazespatial cognitionsticklebacksT-maze

Identifiers

PMID37386747
PMCPMC10952265

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.