Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41160268›Full record

ReviewFish physiology and biochemistry2025

Regeneration in fish, with special focus on killifishes.

Mina Motamedi, Behnaz Akbarpour

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Fish physiology and biochemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Mina MotamediDepartment of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran. m.motamedi@uk.ac.ir.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9918-8298
Behnaz AkbarpourDepartment of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran.

Funding

Shahid Bahonar University of kerman gn-1398-404
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Killifish are notable for their remarkable regenerative capabilities, offering valuable insights into vertebrate tissue repair. This review synthesizes current knowledge on fish regeneration, focusing on the emerging model organism killifish Aphaniops hormuzensis (family Aphaniidae), a species capable of regenerating multiple structures-including the caudal fin, kidneys, central nervous system (telencephalon and spinal cord), and integumentary structures (scales). A comparative analysis with established models like zebrafish and medaka underscores the exceptional speed and efficiency of A. hormuzensis regeneration; it achieves complete spinal cord restoration within five days and brain tissue repair within seven days post-injury-significantly faster than zebrafish. The species employs blastema-mediated epimorphic regeneration, mirroring mechanisms in other teleosts but at an accelerated rate. Like many short-lived vertebrates, A. hormuzensis displays age-dependent declines in regenerative capacity, a trait explored in related killifishes. We explore the ecological and evolutionary implications of these traits, synthesizing how killifish models bridge comparative biology and regenerative medicine. The review critically evaluates the potential of killifishes, particularly A. hormuzensis, as powerful models for biomedical research, arguing that their unique regenerative kinetics and life history traits provide novel insights into neuroregeneration, organ repair, and the impact of aging on tissue repair. By highlighting these advances, this work underscores the importance of diversifying model organisms to fully understand the principles of tissue regeneration and their applications for human health.

Indexed as

KillifishesRegenerationAnimalsAphaniops hormuzensisComparative modelsKillifishRegenerative capacityTeleost fishTissue repair

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.