Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31017958›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Evidence for consistent individual differences in rat sensitivity to carbon dioxide.

Lucía Améndola, Daniel M Weary

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Associations of COPhysiology & behavior · 2025
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen, and Ammonia Levels in Mouse and Rat Disposable IVC Removed from Mechanical Ventilation.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Isoflurane and Carbon Dioxide Elicit Similar Behavioral Responses in Rats.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2020
    Article
  8. Understanding rat emotional responses to COTranslational psychiatry · 2020
    Review
  9. Variation in the onset of COScientific reports · 2019
    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.

Lucía AméndolaAnimal Welfare Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0743-5117
Daniel M WearyAnimal Welfare Program, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0917-3982

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carbon dioxide (CO2) gradual-fill is commonly used to kill laboratory rats, but this use remains controversial due to a lack of agreement between studies. Inconsistencies may arise from differences in behaviors measured (e.g. active versus passive behaviors), in how rats cope with threats, or in rat sensitivity to CO2. The aims of the current study were to 1) describe active and passive responses during CO2 forced exposure, 2) determine if these responses are consistent within individuals and across aversive stimuli, 3) assess individual differences in aversion to CO2 in aversion-avoidance and approach-avoidance tests and 4) determine how responses in aversion tests relate to individual differences in behavior during forced exposure. Twelve Sprague Dawley female rats were exposed twice to three treatments: CO2, oxygen (O2), and fox scent, and were exposed to CO2 twice in each aversion test. The change in behavior from baseline was higher for rearing and locomotion when rats were exposed to CO2 than when exposed to O2 and fox scent. Responses varied among rats but were consistent across multiple tests within rats. For example, rearing was consistent within individuals between two exposures to CO2. Similarly, the strength of aversion was consistent within individuals across multiple exposures to CO2 in aversion-avoidance and approach-avoidance testing. Latency to avoid CO2 in aversion-avoidance tests was negatively correlated with rearing during CO2 forced exposure. Collectively, these results indicate that rat responses to CO2 vary between (but are consistent within) individuals, suggesting that rats vary in CO2 sensitivity. However, even the less responsive rats avoided CO2 concentrations far below those necessary to achieve unconsciousness, indicating that all rats likely experience negative states when euthanized with CO2.

Indexed as

AnimalsAvoidance LearningBehavior, AnimalCarbon DioxideFemaleRats, Sprague-DawleyCarbon Dioxide

Identifiers

PMID31017958
PMCPMC6481838

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.