Public peer review adds context, not a larval feeding rule

The evidence library is allowed to change in public. This page preserves the revised boundary, why it moved and which guides were affected.

What changed

The early-development backlog now records the complete public review history for a 2021 Neocaridina midgut study while keeping the paper out of the method-reviewed evidence corpus.

Why it changed

The reviews identify the microscopy and cell-death approaches and say zoea I were non-feeding and lecithotrophic while zoea III were feeding. They also document correction of a duplicated image, cell terminology, labels, table headlines and interpretation. The final article, specimen allocation, independent microscopy units, assay controls, denominators and statistics remain unavailable, so the review record cannot establish a home feeding stage or overturn direct-development descriptions.

Sources reviewed for this change

Affected practical guides

A public change is not automatically a retraction. A source may be added, a scope narrowed, a gap refined or an error corrected. The current guide and registry record own the current wording.

Follow or challenge the record

Subscribe to the research-update feed or submit a stable source and proposed correction.