Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37700907›Full record

ReviewAnimal reproduction2023

Biobanks, offspring fitness and the influence of developmental plasticity in conservation biology.

William Vincent Holt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Animal reproduction, 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. Advancing Wildlife Conservation Through Biobanking in South America.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025
    Review
  3. 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

1 author.

William Vincent HoltAcademic Unit of Reproductive and Developmental Medicine, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9039-8651

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mitigation of the widely known threats to the world's biodiversity is difficult, despite the strategies and actions proposed by international agreements such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Nevertheless, many scientists devote their time and effort to finding and implementing various solutions to the problem. One potential way forward that is gaining popularity involves the establishment of biobank programs aimed at preserving and storing germplasm from threatened species, and then using it to support the future viability and health of threatened populations. This involves developing and using assisted reproductive technologies to achieve their goals. Despite considerable advances in the effectiveness of reproductive technologies, differences between the reproductive behavior and physiology of widely differing taxonomic groups mean that this approach cannot be applied with equal success to many species. Moreover, evidence that epigenetic influences and developmental plasticity, whereby it is now understood that embryonic development, and subsequent health in later life, can be affected by peri-conceptional environmental conditions, is raising the possibility that cryopreservation methods themselves may have to be reviewed and revised when planning the biobanks. Here, I describe the benefits and problems associated with germplasm biobanking across various species, but also offer some realistic assessments of current progress and applications.

Indexed as

amphibiansbiodiversitycoralscryopreservationextinctiongenetic resources

Identifiers

PMID37700907
PMCPMC10494884

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.