ArticleScientific reports2024
Effects of angler's groundbaits on fish physiology and growth.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although angler's groundbaits (GBs) can be an important food resource for fish, we do not know much about the effects of GB consumption on the growth and health of fish. To fill this knowledge gap, we conducted a controlled, six-week long feeding trial (feeding ration: 2% of body weight) with common carp at 22 °C (Cyprinus carpio, mean initial body weight: 557 g) to test the effect of two GBs composed mostly of animal-derived ingredients (AN-GBs) and two plant-based GBs (PL-GBs) relative to one aquaculture feed, as a control (five treatment altogether). Consumption of PL-GBs resulted in lower growth rate than AN-GBs, presumably due to the low protein content. However, the unit biomass increment per unit nitrogen input was higher in PL-GBs. Although PL-GBs resulted in reduction of hepatic energy reserves, hepatosomatic index, viscerosomatic index, and body condition did not differ among the treatments. We did not find differences in expression of inflammatory cytokines in the liver. In conclusion, AN-GBs more effectively increases the carrying capacity of fisheries, but fish sequester a higher portion of nitrogen content of PL-GBs -PL-GB input can be more effectively counterbalanced by fish removal. Finally, the GB consumption does not pose a health risk to fish.
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.