Electrosedation of freshwater fishes for the surgical implantation of transmitters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although electrosedation is becoming a frequently used technique to anaesthetize fish for a variety of commercial, management, and research applications, limited information is available on the effectiveness of different settings (e.g., voltage, frequency, shocking duration) and target species. We examined recovery times and short-term survival while using a commercially available electroanaesthesia unit to prepare fishes for transmitter implantation surgeries and ran experimental tests without surgery on different electrosedation settings. Our results indicate that electrosedation is a quick and efficient form of anaesthesia, with full anaesthesia achieved, surgeries completed, and recovery in under 10 min for common carp (Cyprinus carpio L., 1758), goldfish (Carassius auratus (L. 1758)), and others. We had zero mortality over at least 24 h associated with electrosedation. We found no significant differences in recovery times related to species or mass, nor did we find any significant changes to recovery time when changing voltage applied, frequency, shocking duration, or when changing the type of pulse applied (e.g., burst pulses vs. standard pulse). Although further researches are needed to address the sublethal and long-term effects of eletrosedation, these findings are important to researchers for selecting suitable target species and optimizing recovery time and survival for a quick release after surgery, tagging, or any time fish sedation is required.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".