Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39754488›Full record

ArticleJournal of fish biology2025

Habituation with apparatus and group testing improves assessment of fish preferences.

Chiara Varracchio, Francesco Pio Paci, Cristiano Bertolucci, Giorgio Bertorelle, Tyrone Lucon-Xiccato

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of fish biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Chiara VarracchioDepartment of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1855-7796
Francesco Pio PaciDepartment of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Cristiano BertolucciDepartment of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Giorgio BertorelleDepartment of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.
Tyrone Lucon-XiccatoDepartment of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy.

Funding

Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca Ministerial Decree of April 9, 2022 351
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preference tests are commonly used to assess fish behavior and cognition in several research fields. This study aimed to investigate how fish perform in a preference test involving extended habituation to the apparatus, which was expected to reduce stress. We contrasted the choice between a sector of the apparatus with natural vegetation, expected to be the preferred stimulus, and a barren sector. Initially, we demonstrated that guppies' preference for the sector with vegetation increased after a 5-day habituation period (Experiment 1). Subsequent experiments systematically modified the testing paradigm to observe effects on the preference. Experiment 2 introduced a physical separation between sectors to facilitate discrete choices, Experiment 3 tested groups of fish, and Experiment 4 used wild guppies. Only the modification in Experiment 3 impacted preference scores: guppies tested in groups showed a higher preference for the vegetation stimulus and spent less time in the central, no-choice sector of the testing apparatus. Overall, this study supports the importance of methodological details in preference tests and highlights the benefits of extended habituation and group testing. Researchers should consider these factors when designing experiments to evaluate cognitive abilities or behavioral preferences in fish. Tailoring testing paradigms to specific research goals can improve the reliability and comparability of results, contributing to a deeper understanding of fish behavior and welfare.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalChoice BehaviorHabituation, PsychophysiologicPoeciliaAnimalsanimal‐based indicatorschoice testfish cognitionwelfare assessment

Identifiers

PMID39754488
PMCPMC12536055

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.