Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23300663›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Robust and sensitive analysis of mouse knockout phenotypes.

Natasha A Karp, David Melvin, Sanger Mouse Genetics Project, Richard F Mott

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. A comprehensive and comparative phenotypic analysis of the collaborative founder strains identifies new and known phenotypes.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Disease models & mechanisms · 2017
    Article
  12. Article
  13. WD40-repeat 47, a microtubule-associated protein, is essential for brain development and autophagy.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2017
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Natasha A KarpMouse Informatics Group, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Hinxton, Cambridge, United Kingdom. nk3@sanger.ac.uk
David Melvin
Sanger Mouse Genetics Project
Richard F Mott

Funding

Mouse Phenotyping Informatics Infrastruture - MP12U54HG006370 · NHGRI · EUROPEAN MOLECULAR BIOLOGY LABORATORY · PI BROWN, STEVE, FLICEK, PAUL · 2011 to 2015
$11.4M
NHGRI NIH HHS 1 U54 HG006370-01NHGRI NIH HHS U54 HG006370Wellcome Trust 090532Wellcome Trust WT098051
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A significant challenge of in-vivo studies is the identification of phenotypes with a method that is robust and reliable. The challenge arises from practical issues that lead to experimental designs which are not ideal. Breeding issues, particularly in the presence of fertility or fecundity problems, frequently lead to data being collected in multiple batches. This problem is acute in high throughput phenotyping programs. In addition, in a high throughput environment operational issues lead to controls not being measured on the same day as knockouts. We highlight how application of traditional methods, such as a Student's t-Test or a 2-way ANOVA, in these situations give flawed results and should not be used. We explore the use of mixed models using worked examples from Sanger Mouse Genome Project focusing on Dual-Energy X-Ray Absorptiometry data for the analysis of mouse knockout data and compare to a reference range approach. We show that mixed model analysis is more sensitive and less prone to artefacts allowing the discovery of subtle quantitative phenotypes essential for correlating a gene's function to human disease. We demonstrate how a mixed model approach has the additional advantage of being able to include covariates, such as body weight, to separate effect of genotype from these covariates. This is a particular issue in knockout studies, where body weight is a common phenotype and will enhance the precision of assigning phenotypes and the subsequent selection of lines for secondary phenotyping. The use of mixed models with in-vivo studies has value not only in improving the quality and sensitivity of the data analysis but also ethically as a method suitable for small batches which reduces the breeding burden of a colony. This will reduce the use of animals, increase throughput, and decrease cost whilst improving the quality and depth of knowledge gained.

Indexed as

Gene Knockout TechniquesPhenotypeAnimalsComputational BiologyData MiningFemaleHumansLinear ModelsMaleMiceReference Values

Identifiers

PMID23300663
PMCPMC3530558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.