ArticleFish physiology and biochemistry2025
Evaluating anaesthetic impacts on rainbow trout mucus biomarkers: towards sustainable aquatic animal welfare.
Article in Fish physiology and biochemistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Omics technologies in aquafeed: unlocking the black box towards systems biology.Functional & integrative genomics · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Anaesthesia is a necessary step during fish manipulation. Tricaine methane-sulfonate (MS-222) is the most commonly used anaesthetic in experimental trials; however, its use in food fish production is strictly regulated. This study aimed to evaluate clove oil, less persistent and authorized in European countries, as an alternative to MS-222 for skin mucus analyses in aquaculture settings. For this purpose, rainbow trout individuals from a commercial factory were sedated with clove oil or MS-222. The concentration of protein, glucose, lactate, and cortisol and the antibacterial activity were measured in both skin mucus and plasma. Additionally, FRAP, total protease activity, and lysozyme activity were also analysed for mucus samples. Recovery times differed significantly between treatments, being approximately four times longer for clove oil (at the farm's standard dose) than for MS-222 (at the standard laboratory dose). However, none of the stress-related biomarkers in mucus were affected by the anaesthetic treatment, whereas plasma from clove oil-treated fish showed increased lactate and reduced cortisol levels. The in vitro bacterial growth inhibition assay using mucus and plasma provides a reliable and rapid method for assessing fish innate immunity. No significant differences were observed between treatments against any of the bacterial strains tested. Overall, the findings strongly endorse the use of skin mucus as an effective method for studying and monitoring trout in aquaculture settings.
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.