ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2025
Electrophysiological responses of the clam (Ruditapes decussatus) osphradium to amino acids and alarm cues.
Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chemical sensing of the surrounding environment is crucial for many aspects of bivalve biology, such as food detection and predator avoidance. Aquatic organisms strongly depend on chemosensory systems; however, little is known about chemosensory systems in bivalves. To understand how the carpet shell clam (Ruditapes decussatus) senses its surrounding chemical environment, we used an electrophysiological technique - the electro-osphradiogram - to assess the sensitivity of the osphradium to different putative odorants (amino acids, bile acids) and odours (predator-released cues and signals from con- and heterospecific bivalves). The clam osphradium was sensitive to most proteinogenic L-amino acids, evoking negative, tonic, and concentration-dependent responses. However, acidic amino acids (L-glutamic and L-aspartic acid), L-arginine and bile acids (cholic, taurocholic and taurolithocholic acid) failed to evoke any response. Surprisingly, while cues from injured bivalves (con- and heterospecific) evoked strong responses, predator-released cues (green crab, Carcinus maenas) failed to elicit any response, whether fed or unfed. That predator-released cues failed to evoke an electrophysiological response in the clam osphradium may indicate that they use cues released by injured prey - alarm cues - to avoid predation and/or that predators are detected by different sensory modalities. Indeed, the behavioural assays, performed to understand how clams make use of such sensory inputs, revealed that the activity index decreased after exposure to water conditioned with injured conspecifics, suggesting the origin of such alarm cues. Further research is needed to identify the chemical nature of these cues. We suggest that the electro-osphradiogram will be a useful tool in this endeavour.
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.