ReviewThe Journal of experimental biology2024
Making in vitro conditions more reflective of in vivo conditions for research on the teleost gastrointestinal tract.
Review in The Journal of experimental biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A 30-year retrospective on the respirometric method for measuring instantaneous metabolic fuel use in fish.Journal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology · 2026Review
- Tools and approaches to study the human gut virome: from the bench to bioinformatics.mSystems · 2026Review
- Psychobiotics in Aquaculture: Harnessing the Microbiome-Gut-Brain Axis for Stress Management and Production Enhancement in Fish.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Osmoregulatory contributions of the corticotropin-releasing factor system in the intestine of Atlantic salmon.The Journal of experimental biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To date, the majority of in vitro or ex vivo fish gastrointestinal research has been conducted under unrealistic conditions. In a living fish, ionic conditions, as well as levels of ammonia, pH, HCO3- and PCO2 differ considerably between the different regions of the gastrointestinal tract. These factors also differ from those of the saline often used in gut research. Furthermore, the oxygen gradient from the serosa to the gut lumen is rarely considered: in contrast to the serosa, the lumen is a hypoxic/anoxic environment. In addition, the gut microbiome plays a significant role in gut physiology, increasing the complexity of the in vivo gut, but replicating the microbial community for in vitro studies is exceptionally difficult. However, there are ways in which we can begin to overcome these challenges. Firstly, the luminal chemistry and PO2 in each gut compartment must be carefully considered. Secondly, although microbiological culture techniques are improving, we must learn how to maintain the microbiome diversity seen in vivo. Finally, for ex vivo studies, developing mucosal (luminal) solutions that more closely mimic the in vivo conditions will better replicate physiological processes. Within the field of mammalian gut physiology, great advances in 'gut-on-chip' devices are providing the tools to better replicate in vivo conditions; adopting and adapting this technology may assist in fish gut research initiatives. This Commentary aims to make fish gut physiologists aware of the various issues in replicating the in vivo conditions and identifies solutions as well as those areas that require further improvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.