ArticleScientific reports2025
Biometric analysis of Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum, 1792) and Salmo trutta, Linnaeus, 1758 from the different habitat in Himachal Pradesh.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Biometric analysis offered important information on growth patterns, population differentiation, and habitat effects in trout. The present study aimed to evaluate variations among diverse ecological conditions and growth patterns across three farm sites of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) and three river sites of brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Himachal Pradesh. Length weight relationship (LWR) was estimated via a log-transformed linear model (LM), unweighted nonlinear least squares (NLS), and weighted NLS (wNLS). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to test differences among rivers and farms. Morphometric and meristic variables were measured, and principal component analysis (PCA) was used to assess shape variation among sites. Rainbow trout specimens demonstrated isometric and positive allometric growth across all samples, with 'b' values ranging from 2.992 to 3.15. The brown trout population exhibited more variable growth patterns; S6 showed negative allometric growth (b = 2.822-2.847), while others approached isometric growth (b = 2.936-2.993), which reflect differences in body form. PCA revealed that size-related traits explain most of the variation for PC1 (principal component 1), while shape and cranial traits variation contribute to PC2, distinguishing populations among different habitats. Length-length relationships (LLRs) also showed a strong correlation between total length and standard length (r
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.