Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33024186›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

The epidemiology of fighting in group-housed laboratory mice.

Jacob H Theil, Jamie Ahloy-Dallaire, Elin M Weber, Brianna N Gaskill, Kathleen R Pritchett-Corning, Stephen A Felt, Joseph P Garner

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Intact corticostriatal function in aged system xTranslational psychiatry · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

7 authors.

Jacob H TheilCampus Veterinary Services, University of California, Davis, One Shields Ave., Davis, CA, 95616, USA.
Jamie Ahloy-DallaireDépartement des Sciences Animales, Université Laval, Quebec, QC, G1V 0A6, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6515-4009
Elin M WeberDepartment of Animal Environment and Health, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Gråbrödragatan 19, 532 31, Skara, Sweden.
Brianna N GaskillAnimal Sciences Department, Purdue University, 270 S. Russell St., West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA.
Kathleen R Pritchett-CorningOffice of Animal Resources, Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences, 16 Divinity Ave., Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1888-4751
Stephen A FeltDepartment of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305-5342, USA.
Joseph P GarnerDepartment of Comparative Medicine, Stanford University, 300 Pasteur Drive, Stanford, CA, 94305-5342, USA. jgarner@stanford.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3209-9389

Funding

Research Education Program for Laboratory Animal Medicine Veterinarians (R25)R25OD010452 · OD · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI FELT, STEPHEN · 2012 to 2015
$625k
NIH HHS R25 OD010452
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Injurious home-cage aggression (fighting) in mice affects both animal welfare and scientific validity. It is arguably the most common potentially preventable morbidity in mouse facilities. Existing literature on mouse aggression almost exclusively examines territorial aggression induced by introducing a stimulus mouse into the home-cage of a singly housed mouse (i.e. the resident/intruder test). However, fighting occurring in mice living together in long-term groups under standard laboratory housing conditions has barely been studied. We performed a point-prevalence epidemiological survey of fighting at a research institution with an approximate 60,000 cage census. A subset of cages was sampled over the course of a year and factors potentially influencing home-cage fighting were recorded. Fighting was almost exclusively seen in group-housed male mice. Approximately 14% of group-housed male cages were observed with fighting animals in brief behavioral observations, but only 14% of those cages with fighting had skin injuries observable from cage-side. Thus simple cage-side checks may be missing the majority of fighting mice. Housing system (the combination of cage ventilation and bedding type), genetic background, time of year, cage location on the rack, and rack orientation in the room were significant risk factors predicting fighting. Of these predictors, only bedding type is easily manipulated to mitigate fighting. Cage ventilation and rack orientation often cannot be changed in modern vivaria, as they are baked in by cookie-cutter architectural approaches to facility design. This study emphasizes the need to invest in assessing the welfare costs of new housing and husbandry systems before implementing them.

Indexed as

AggressionAnimal HusbandryAnimal WelfareBehavior, AnimalHousing, AnimalAnimalsAnimals, LaboratoryFemaleMaleMiceRisk FactorsVentilation

Identifiers

PMID33024186
PMCPMC7538892

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.