ArticleJournal of fish biology2026
Validating gut flushing as a non-lethal sampling technique for diet monitoring in agastric fish.
Article in Journal of fish biology, 2026. 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
Abstract
Non-lethal diet sampling is essential where individual-level monitoring and welfare matter, yet evidence on season-long outcomes in agastric fishes is scarce. We tested syringe-based gut flushing in pond-reared common carp Cyprinus carpio over one growing season (April-September) using PIT-tagged fish assigned a priori to three handling histories: flushed (sedated, measured, flushed), handled-only (sedated, measured), and unhandled controls. At harvest, recapture (survival proxy) remained high and statistically similar among handled groups and growth to harvest did not differ across treatments (end-point mass: flushed 1857.3 ± 367.4 g; handled-only 1769.7 ± 311.8 g; unhandled 1731.9 ± 392.6 g). A mid-season divergence in July (handled-only > flushed in weight gain) was transient and absent at harvest. Operational performance scaled predictably: total water required to clear effluent increased with fish size (~20 mL in small carp to >90 mL in large individuals; occasional ~120 mL) and varied seasonally, rising from May to August and easing in September. Practical safeguards (rounded catheters guided between pharyngeal teeth; conservative advancement ≤2 cm beyond the teeth; controlled bolus infusions; standardised recovery) supported complete evacuations with low injury risk. Collectively, these results validate gut flushing as a field-ready, non-lethal method that can be integrated into routine dietary monitoring of agastric cyprinids without compromising survival or harvest growth, while providing simple, size- and season-based parameters to standardise protocols across studies.
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.