ArticleZebrafish2018
Workshop Report: Zebrafish and Other Fish Models-Description of Extrinsic Environmental Factors for Rigorous Experiments and Reproducible Results.
Article in Zebrafish, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of Different Microalgae Biomass Typologies Used in Rotifers Enrichment for Zebrafish (Aquaculture nutrition · 2025Article
- Plasma proteome responses in zebrafish following λ-carrageenan-Induced inflammation are mediated by PMN leukocytes and correlate highly with their human counterparts.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Standardized Reference Diets for Zebrafish: Addressing Nutritional Control in Experimental Methodology.Annual review of nutrition · 2021Article
- Limits of temperature adaptation and thermopreferendum.Cell & bioscience · 2021Article
- The Laboratory Domestication of Zebrafish: From Diverse Populations to Inbred Substrains.Molecular biology and evolution · 2020Article
- Use of Zebrafish in Drug Discovery Toxicology.Chemical research in toxicology · 2020Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Current standards for husbandry and maintenance of zebrafish and other aquatic species in the laboratory are diverse, and are subject to laboratory performance, engineering, and practice standards (the Guide), institutional interpretation, national animal welfare laws, and cultural differences. Consequently, it is difficult, and probably not advantageous, to establish a single standard in view of the hardy nature of zebrafish and the diversity of research requirements it is used to address. Based on their natural habitat, zebrafish can thrive in a variety of environmental conditions, which is a specific advantage for working with this laboratory organism. However, it also makes reporting and reproducibility difficult, because variations in the husbandry and environmental conditions, including the environmental conditions before and during experiments, are often underreported in the scientific literature. This lack of consistency presents a potential problem for research reproducibility. To begin addressing this emerging scientific gap, the National Institutes of Health's (NIH) Office of Research Infrastructure Programs (ORIP), Division of Construction and Instruments (DCI), hosted a workshop in late 2017, entitled "Zebrafish and Other Aquatic Models: Reporting of Environmental Husbandry Conditions for Rigorous Experiments and Reproducible Results," that was attended by ∼60 participants. The objectives of the workshop were to bring together a diverse group of stakeholders-researchers, facility managers, veterinarians, journal editors, commercial vendors, and others to (1) review current husbandry and environmental management practices for the care of zebrafish and other aquatic organisms in the laboratory and to (2) propose a process for the development of a minimal set of environmental parameters that should be reported in publications to ensure rigor and robustness of experiments and reproducible outcomes. The participants also discussed how these recommendations, as an initial step, might be collected, disseminated, implemented, and improved upon after future iteration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.