Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39024313›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Development of resident and migratory three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus aculeatus.

Megan Barnes, Lisa Chakrabarti, Andrew D C MacColl

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. 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. 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

3 authors.

Megan BarnesSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-4399-4645
Lisa ChakrabartiSchool of Veterinary Medicine and Science, Sutton Bonington Campus, University of Nottingham, Loughborough, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7213-6837
Andrew D C MacCollSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The three-spined stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) is a teleost fish and a model organism in evolutionary ecology, useful for both laboratory and natural experiments. It is especially valued for the substantial intraspecific variation in morphology, behaviour and genetics. Classic work of Swarup (1958) has described the development in the laboratory of embryos from a single freshwater population, but this was carried out at higher temperature than many stickleback would encounter in the wild and variation between populations was not addressed. Here we describe the development of embryos from two sympatric, saltwater ecotypes of stickleback from North Uist, Scotland raised at 14°C, the approximate temperature of North Uist lochs in the breeding season. The two ecotypes were (a) a large, migratory form in which the adults are completely plated with bony armour and (b) a smaller, low-plated form that is resident year-round in saltwater lagoons. By monitoring embryos every 24-hours post fertilisation, important characteristics of development were observed and photographed to provide a reference for North Uist ecotypes at this temperature. Hatching success was greater than 85% and did not differ between resident and migratory stickleback, but migratory eggs hatched significantly earlier than the resident ecotype. Our work provides a framework that can now be used to compare stickleback populations that may also grow in distinct environmental conditions, to help understand the breadth of normal developmental features and to characterise abnormal development.

Indexed as

Animal MigrationSmegmamorphaAnimalsEcotypeEmbryo, NonmammalianFemaleScotlandTemperature

Identifiers

PMID39024313
PMCPMC11257305

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.