Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37787908›Full record

ArticleFish physiology and biochemistry2024

The growth performance of pond-reared common carp (Cyprinus carpio) larvae propagated using cryopreserved sperm.

Zoltán Bokor, Zete Levente Láng, Levente Várkonyi, Ferenc Fodor, Borbála Nagy, Endre Csókás, József Molnár, Balázs Csorbai, Zsolt Csenki-Bakos, Bence Ivánovics and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Fish physiology and biochemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Zoltán BokorDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Zete Levente LángDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Levente VárkonyiDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Ferenc FodorBalaton Fish Management Non-Profit Ltd, Horgony U. 1., 8600, Siofok, Hungary.
Borbála NagyDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Endre CsókásDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
József MolnárDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Balázs CsorbaiDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Zsolt Csenki-BakosDepartment of Environmental Toxicology, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Bence IvánovicsDepartment of Environmental Toxicology, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Jeffrey Daniel GriffittsDepartment of Environmental Toxicology, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Béla UrbányiDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary.
Gergely BernáthDepartment of Aquaculture, Institute for Aquaculture and Environmental Safety, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 2100, Godollo, Hungary. Bernath.Gergely@uni-mate.hu.

Funding

Hungarian Ministry of Agriculture MGEF/20-3/2021Ministry of Innovation and Technology, Thematic Excellence Programme 2020, National Challenges Subprogramme TKP2020-NKA-16National Research, Development and Innovation Office GINOP-2.3.2-15-2016-00004New National Excellence Program of the Ministry for Culture and Innovation, National Research, Development and Innovation Fund ÚNKP-22-3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of our study was to determine the efficacy of utilizing cryopreserved common carp sperm (in comparison to fresh sperm) for propagation at a Hungarian aquaculture facility. The sperm was frozen in 5 mL straws using an extender method that was previously tested in common carp. Sperm motility was monitored using a computer-assisted sperm analysis system. The hatching and malformation rates among the specimens were recorded before the stocking of larvae in both groups. The growth (body weight, total length) and survival rates of the fish were measured during the pre-nursing (from May to June: between 1 and 26 days post hatching) and grow-out periods (from June to October: between 26 and 105 days post hatching) of the same year. The fresh sperm, which was collected and pooled prior to fertilization, showed high MOT (97%), pMOT (92%), VCL (106 µm s

Indexed as

CarpsCryopreservationLarvaSemen PreservationSpermatozoaSperm MotilityAnimalsAquacultureMaleCommon carpCryopreserved spermPre-nursing and grow-outPropagationSurvival rate

Identifiers

PMID37787908
PMCPMC11576788

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.