ArticlePloS one2022
Effects of non-aversive versus tail-lift handling on breeding productivity in a C57BL/6J mouse colony.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enhancing Rodent Welfare, Cost Savings, and Efficiency: Implementation and Review of Data-Driven Improvements.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2026Review
- Lack of evidence for a consistent differential impact of tail and tunnel handling on markers of welfare in laboratory mice.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The effects of handling on mouse behavior: cupped hands versus familiar or novel huts or tunnels.PloS one · 2025Article
- Proper micro-environment alleviates mortality in laboratory mouse breeding induced by litter overlap and older dams.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Paraventricular thalamus-insular cortex circuit mediates colorectal visceral pain induced by neonatal colonic inflammation in mice.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2024Article
- Research Animal Behavioral Management Programs for the 21st Century.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Using refined methods to pick up mice: A survey benchmarking prevalence & beliefs about tunnel and cup handling.PloS one · 2023Article
- Handling method affects measures of anxiety, but not chronic stress in mice.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Handling method affects measures of anxiety, but not chronic stress in mice.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Mouse breeding facilities in Argentina: Current state, challenges, and strengths in relation to animal welfare.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
- Use of nonaversive handling and training procedures for laboratory mice and rats: Attitudes of American and Canadian laboratory animal professionals.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Non-aversive handling is a well-documented refinement measure for improving rodent welfare. Because maternal stress is related to reduced productivity, we hypothesized that welfare benefits associated with non-aversive handling would translate to higher production and fewer litters lost in a laboratory mouse breeding colony. We performed a randomized controlled trial to examine the effects of a standard method of handling (tail-lift with forceps) versus non-aversive handling with transfer tunnels ('tunnel-handled') on breeding performance in 59 C57BL/6J mouse pairs. Intervention assignments could not be concealed from technicians, but were concealed from assessors and data analyst. An operationally significant effect of tunnel-handling (large enough differences to warrant programmatic change) was defined before study initiation as a 5% increase in productivity, or one extra pup over the reproductive lifetime of each pair. Pairs were randomly allocated to handling intervention and cage rack location, and monitored over an entire 6-month breeding cycle. For each group, we measured number of pups born and weaned, and number of entire litters lost prior to weaning. Differences between transfer methods were estimated by two-level hierarchical mixed models adjusted for parental effects and parity. Compared to tail-lift mice, tunnel-handled mice averaged one extra pup per pair born (+1.0; 95% CI 0.9, 1.1; P = 0.41) and weaned (+1.1, 95% CI 0.9, 1.2; P = 0.33). More tunnel-handled pairs successfully weaned all litters produced (13/29 pairs, 45% vs 4/30 pairs, 13%; P = 0.015), averaged fewer litter losses prior to weaning (11/29 pairs [38%] vs 26/30 pairs [87%]; P <0.001), and had a 20% lower risk of recurrent litter loss. The increase in numbers of pups produced and weaned with tunnel handling met threshold requirement for operational significance. These data and projected cost savings persuaded management to incorporate tunnel handling as standard of care across the institution. These data also suggest that overlooked husbandry practices such as cage transfer may be major confounders in studies of mouse models.
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.