“…Furthermore, Abrantes et al (2021) tested the effect of electric fields on largetooth sawfish (Pristis pristis) behaviour and reported reaction distances of <1.2 m to the electrodes but did not quantify the electric field strengths and worked with different electrical waveform characteristics. Few studies have examined the behavioural response of marine fishes to low electric field strengths as the focus has generally been on galvanotaxis/electrotaxis (Bary, 1956;Diner and le Men, 1971;Klima, 1972;Diner and le Men, 1974;Polet, 2010;D'Agaro, 2011), immobilising whole-body muscle contractions referred to as electronarcosis, tetanus, or cramp (Bary, 1956;Diner and le Men, 1971;Diner and le Men, 1974;Stewart, 1977;Polet, 2010;de Haan et al, 2016), and (internal) injuries (van Marlen et al, 2014;de Haan et al, 2016;Desender et al, 2016;Soetaert et al, 2016a;Soetaert et al, 2016b;Soetaert et al, 2016c;Soetaert et al, 2018;Boute, 2022;Boute et al, 2022;Schram et al, 2022;Boute et al, 2023). Bary (1956) studied 'minimum response values' based on body jerks (also referred to as muscle twitches) during stimulation in golden grey mullet (Chelon auratus), European flounder, and European seabass of different body lengths, but in a homogeneous electric field with waveforms different from those used in pulse trawling for common sole.…”