ArticleScience advances2024
Disaggregating animal welfare risks in aquaculture.
Article in Science advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- EPI-DOM framework for assessing fish welfare: external and internal indicators for tilapia.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2026Article
- A functional framework for a comprehensive study of welfare in fishes.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Review
- Predator cues and environmental complexity shape the behaviour and life history of juvenile lobsters (Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Early-life environment shapes claw bilateral asymmetry in the European lobster (Homarus gammarus).Biology open · 2025Article
- Animal welfare risks from commercial practices involving cephalopod molluscs and decapod crustaceans.Animal welfare (South Mimms, England) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aquaculture, fueled partly by claims of supporting food security, is experiencing unprecedented growth. Framing aquaculture as a monolith, however, overlooks its extreme taxonomic diversity. This paper assesses the welfare risks associated with that diversity, establishing seven species-level risk factors from involved parental care to long lifespans. Investigating these welfare risks across all aquatic species reported to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) revealed an uneven distribution of risk, with extreme species-level risks in chordates, crustaceans, and cephalopod mollusks. Compared to species with fewer risks, species with extreme welfare risks were found to cost more and contribute the least to global production. This work challenges the notion that prioritizing animal welfare is incompatible with addressing food security and creates the possibility of identifying certain plant and invertebrate species, like seaweeds and bivalves, that minimize welfare concerns while providing affordability and accessibility. Going forward, proactive welfare approaches are needed to inform consumer choice and shape just and sustainable aquaculture policy.
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.