ArticleJournal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology2022
Contact chemoreception in multi-modal sensing of prey by Octopus.
Article in Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiple Longitudinal Tracts in the Cephalopod Arm Sensorimotor System.The Journal of comparative neurology · 2026Article
- Multiple longitudinal tracts in the cephalopod arm sensorimotor system.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- How octopuses use and recruit additional arms to find and manipulate visually hidden items.Biology open · 2025Article
- Molecular and Morphological Circuitry of the Octopus Sucker Ganglion.The Journal of comparative neurology · 2025Article
- Octopus track chemosensory plumes to find food.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- 'Arm brains' (axial nerves) of Jurassic coleoids and the evolution of coleoid neuroanatomy.Swiss journal of palaeontology · 2023Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Octopuses have keen vision and are generally considered visual predators, yet octopuses predominantly forage blindly in nature, inserting their arms into crevices to search and detect hidden prey. The extent to which octopuses discriminate prey using chemo- versus mechano-tactile sensing is unknown. We developed a whole-animal behavioral assay that takes advantage of octopuses' natural searching behavior to test their ability to discriminate prey from non-prey tastes solely via contact chemoreception. This methodology eliminated vision, mechano-tactile sensing and distance chemoreception while testing the contact chemosensory discriminatory abilities of the octopus arm suckers. Extracts from two types of prey (crab, shrimp) and three types of non-prey (sea star, algae, seawater) were embedded in agarose (to control for mechano-tactile discrimination) and presented to octopuses inside an artificial rock dome; octopuses reached their arms inside to explore its contents - imitating natural prey-searching behavior. Results revealed that octopuses are capable of discriminating between potential prey items using only contact chemoreception, as measured by an increased amount of sucker contact time and arm curls when presented with prey extracts versus non-prey extracts. These results highlight the importance of contact chemoreception in the multi-modal sensing involved in a complex foraging behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.