Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30848040›Full record

ArticleGenes, brain, and behavior2019

Housing mice in the individually ventilated or open cages-Does it matter for behavioral phenotype?

Johanna Åhlgren, Vootele Voikar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, brain, and behavior, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. What's wrong with my experiment?: The impact of hidden variables on neuropsychopharmacology research.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2022
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Evaluation of Various IVC Systems According to Mouse Reproductive Performance and Husbandry and Environmental Parameters.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Johanna ÅhlgrenLaboratory Animal Center, Helsinki Institute of Life Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Vootele VoikarNeuroscience Center, Helsinki Institute of Life Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-4201-8666

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individually ventilated caging (IVC) systems for rodents are increasingly common in laboratory animal facilities. However, the impact of such substantial change in housing conditions on animal physiology and behavior is still debated. Most importantly, there arise the questions regarding reproducibility and comparison of previous or new phenotypes between the IVC and open cages. The present study was set up for detailed and systematic comparison of behavioral phenotypes in male and female mice of three widely used inbred strains (C57BL/6JRccHsd, DBA/2JRccHsd, 129S2/SvHSd) after being kept in two housing environments (IVC and open cages) for 6 weeks (since 4 weeks of age) before behavioral testing. The tests addressed exploratory, anxiety-like and stress-related behavior (light-dark box, open field, forced swim test, stress-induced hyperthermia), social approach and species-specific behavior (nest building, marble burying). In all tests, large and expected strain differences were found. Somewhat surprisingly, the most striking effect of environment was found for basal body temperature and weight loss after one night of single housing in respective cages. In addition, the performance in light-dark box and open field was affected by environment. Several parameters in different tests showed significant interaction between housing and genetic background. In summary, the IVC housing did not invalidate the well-known differences between the mouse strains which have been established by previous studies. However, within the strains the results can be influenced by sex and housing system depending on the behavioral tasks applied. The bottom-line is that the environmental conditions should be described explicitly in all publications.

Indexed as

Behavior, AnimalPhenotypeAnimalsFemaleHousing, AnimalMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLVentilationbehaviorenvironmenthousinginbredIVCmicephenotypingreproducibilitysexspecies-specific

Identifiers

PMID30848040
PMCPMC6849734

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.