Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37681193›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in behavioral neuroscience2023

Animal-friendly behavioral testing in field studies: examples from ground squirrels.

Scott Nunes

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Scott NunesDepartment of Biology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Field studies of behavior provide insight into the expression of behavior in its natural ecological context and can serve as an important complement to behavioral studies conducted in the lab under controlled conditions. In addition to naturalistic observations, behavioral testing can be an important component of field studies of behavior. This mini review evaluates a sample of behavioral testing methods in field studies to identify ways in which behavioral testing can be animal-friendly and generate ethologically relevant data. Specific examples, primarily from studies of ground squirrels, are presented to illustrate ways in which principles of animal-friendly behavioral testing can be applied to and guide testing methods. Tests conducted with animals in their natural habitat and that elicit naturally occurring behavioral responses can minimize stress and disturbance for animals, as well as disruption of the larger ecosystem, and can have high ethological validity. When animals are trapped or handled as part of a study, behavioral testing can be incorporated into handling procedures to reduce overall disturbance. When behavior is evaluated in a testing arena, the arena can be designed to resemble natural conditions to increase the ethological relevance of the test. Efforts to minimize time spent in testing arenas can also reduce disturbance to animals. Adapting a behavioral test to a species or habitat conditions can facilitate reduced disruption to subjects and increased ethological relevance of the test.

Indexed as

animal-friendlyanimal welfarebehavioral testingfield studyground squirrelrodent

Identifiers

PMID37681193
PMCPMC10480841

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.