The Berried Clubby Molt & Moss
Menu

Open this record in the complete research map

Field observation Neocaridina identity evidence

Life-history traits and ecological characteristics of the ornamental shrimp Neocaridina denticulata, recently introduced into the freshwater systems of Israel

Levitt-Barmats et al., 2019. Aquatic Invasions 14(4): 684-702.

Open the source

This record is a claim boundary, not a quality badge. Evidence class and species relationship describe what was studied. They do not make the result universal, complete or automatically applicable to a home aquarium.

Source taxon as published
Neocaridina denticulata, with identity uncertainty discussed by the authors
Environment
Thirty Israeli field locations plus laboratory observation at 20 to 25 C across three generations
Life stages
field adult, ovigerous female, known-hatch juvenile, laboratory generation
Reviewed
2026-08-12

What was studied

Study shape: Field occurrence, morphology and mitochondrial markers were combined with an unreplicated laboratory lineage; 18 third-generation larvae were separated for individual molt and growth observations.

Experimental unit: Field specimen or sampling site for field endpoints; individual jar for 18 third-generation growth observations

Endpoints: field occurrence, morphology, COI and 16S sequences, embryo count, age at first ovigerous stage, molt interval, growth.

Claim boundary

What it can support: The study documents a wide field-occurrence range and follows known-hatch third-generation individuals for molt and growth observations over 49 weeks under one laboratory protocol.

What it cannot support: Taxonomic placement within the complex remained uncertain, field occurrence is not a water optimum, and losses plus an incomplete growth series do not provide a replicated hatch-to-death lifespan distribution.

Publication status audit

Matched in dated Crossref query

The canonical DOI appeared in the dated broad query and carried no registered update in that response. This is a metadata observation, not proof that the work has never changed.

Metadata snapshot reviewed 2026-08-12. Inspect the method, unmatched queue and limitations.

Correction impact

If this source boundary changes, these are the known downstream consumers. The list distinguishes scientific re-review from generated parity and historical follow-up.

Editorial review required (13)

This curated wording or synthesis must be reconsidered when the source boundary changes. A passing generator test cannot decide the new scientific meaning.

  • growth decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • parameters decision card Tank-side decision card
    The card translates this guide into an observation, first action, next record and stopping boundary, so all four require editorial review when the source changes.
  • growth practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • parameters practical guide Practical guide
    The guide uses this evidence record and its practical wording must remain inside the revised source boundary.
  • aquarium-lifespan knowledge gap Canonical knowledge gap
    The current knowledge-gap boundary depends on a dated search that used this exact source and must be reconsidered if the source meaning changes.
  • carrying-capacity knowledge gap Canonical knowledge gap
    The current knowledge-gap boundary depends on a dated search that used this exact source and must be reconsidered if the source meaning changes.
  • water-parameter-optima knowledge gap Canonical knowledge gap
    The current knowledge-gap boundary depends on a dated search that used this exact source and must be reconsidered if the source meaning changes.
  • aquarium-lifespan answerability brief Answerability brief
    The decision, endpoint, minimum design or closure rule may change when evidence used in the linked gap search is corrected.
  • carrying-capacity answerability brief Answerability brief
    The decision, endpoint, minimum design or closure rule may change when evidence used in the linked gap search is corrected.
  • water-parameter-optima answerability brief Answerability brief
    The decision, endpoint, minimum design or closure rule may change when evidence used in the linked gap search is corrected.
  • aquarium-lifespan research allocation Current research allocation
    The current allocation, activation trigger, next permitted unit or stop decision may change when evidence used in the linked gap search is corrected.
  • carrying-capacity research allocation Current research allocation
    The current allocation, activation trigger, next permitted unit or stop decision may change when evidence used in the linked gap search is corrected.
  • water-parameter-optima research allocation Current research allocation
    The current allocation, activation trigger, next permitted unit or stop decision may change when evidence used in the linked gap search is corrected.

Generated from governing registry (13)

This surface derives from a governing registry and should update with it, but release tests must still prove parity and routing.

Historical record needs follow-up decision (3)

Do not silently rewrite history. Decide whether the prior change record remains accurate and publish a new correction or scope note when needed.

Inspect the corpus-wide propagation audit.

How this record is classified

Field observation: Animals were observed in a field population. Occurrence and association do not create a home-aquarium optimum or prove causation.

Neocaridina identity evidence: The source addresses identity, relationships or genetics within the Neocaridina complex.

Topics: Growth and lifespan, Breeding, Species and taxonomy, Water parameters, Wild populations

Critically appraise this source without a score

These questions fit this record's field observation role. They are prompts, not automatic judgments. Open the original source to answer them.

  1. Identity and provenance: How were the organism, population, stock and life stage identified and sourced? A published name or seller label can hide a taxonomic, population or life-stage transfer.
  2. Independent unit: What unit was independently assigned or sampled, and how many units support each comparison? Animal counts do not create independent replication when animals share a vessel, site, family or treatment history.
  3. Comparison and context: What was the actual comparator, allocation process, environment, duration and material condition? A result has meaning only against the comparison and conditions that produced it.
  4. Endpoint and measurement: Which endpoint was measured, with what method, unit, timing, resolution and decision rule? One endpoint cannot silently become survival, welfare, diagnosis, reproduction or long-term population performance.
  5. Denominators and missingness: Are starting counts, exclusions, losses, missing observations and analysis denominators reconciled? Unreported or changing denominators can alter the apparent direction, precision and applicability of a result.
  6. Transfer boundary: What is the nearest tempting aquarium claim that this source design cannot establish? Direct evidence can still be narrow, and adjacent evidence can be useful only while the inference remains visible.
  7. Sampling frame: How were sites, dates, habitats and animals selected, and what population can that sampling represent? Convenient or uneven sampling limits prevalence, abundance and seasonal inference.
  8. Sampling effort: Was effort standardized or recorded across sites, times and environmental conditions? Observed counts can change because detectability or effort changed rather than the population.
  9. Association: Which co-varying environmental or biological factors could explain the observed association? Field correlation does not by itself identify cause or a husbandry intervention.
  10. Detection and absence: Could non-detection reflect gear, visibility, season, behavior or identification limits? Not observed is not equivalent to absent.

Read the complete appraisal framework.

Where it is used

Reuse the reviewed citation boundary

Download CSL-JSON or download RIS. Both retain this record's support, limitation and review note.

Challenge a transcription, interpretation or missing boundary. A challenge changes the record only after editorial review.