ArticleFish physiology and biochemistry2025
Positional effects of passive integrated transponder tags on rejection, survival, and health biomarkers in pearlspot cichlid (Etroplus suratensis).
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. 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Passive integrated transponder (PIT) tagging is essential in fisheries research to monitor fish growth, health, and migration, and facilitate selective breeding and aquaculture advancement. The study was conducted for 30 days to assess the effect of the PIT tag (12 mm × 2.1 mm) on juvenile Etroplus suratensis. The tagging study consisted of five treatments, viz., dorsal horizontal (DH), dorsal vertical (DV), peritoneal cavity via injection (PCI), peritoneal cavity via incision and manual insertion (PCM), and untagged control (UT) in triplicate. Fifteen circular containers containing 60 L of UV-sterilized water were stocked with 15 juveniles each, with an average weight of 10.60 ± 0.06 g and a total length of 67.75 ± 1.07 mm. Fish were given commercial floating feed with 38% crude protein thrice daily (9 am, 1 pm, and 5 pm). In the present study, the DV-tagged juveniles had the highest survival (95.55 ± 2.22%) with a low tag rejection rate (4.44 ± 2.22%) and a higher weight gain (5.10 ± 0.76 g), followed by the DH-tagged, which showed survival of 91.11 ± 2.22% with a tag rejection of 31.11 ± 2.22% and a weight gain of 4.36 ± 0.23 g. The serum biochemical and haematological parameters were substantially higher in tagged fish than in untagged fish. Histological examination of tagged fish revealed observable changes in myocytes compared with untagged fish. Analysis of growth, survivability, tag rejection rate, and histological interpretations indicate that DV tagging is the best practice for E. suratensis juveniles. This study highlighted the importance of optimizing PIT tagging procedures for E. suratensis and demonstrated that the insertion position significantly influences tag retention, survival, and stress parameters. The results enhance the acceptability of PIT tagging in pearlspot for aquaculture and stock assessment studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40019642What 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.