Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39061507›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2024

The Future Is Not Bright: Evaluation of Rat Preferences for Color and Intensity of Light.

Melissa Swan, Aidan Horvath, Rebecca K Pritchett, Amanda J Barabas, Debra Hickman, Brianna N Gaskill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2024. 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

6 authors.

Melissa SwanCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Aidan HorvathCollege of Veterinary Medicine, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA.
Rebecca K PritchettAnimal Sciences Department, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA.
Amanda J BarabasAnimal Sciences Department, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4953-5458
Debra HickmanLaboratory Animal Resource Center, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3810-3657
Brianna N GaskillAnimal Sciences Department, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47906, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1884-803X

Funding

American College for Laboratory Animal Medicine 2015 application
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Light is a key factor influencing the welfare of laboratory rodents, but little is known about their optimal lighting condition. It i common knowledge that rats prefer dim light, so bright light is mitigated with red-tinted shelters or cages, which alter both the color and intensity of light. Because both aspects are altered, the contribution of each feature to rodent preference is unknown. Further, it is unknown if this preference is influenced by previous experience. We hypothesized that rats would prefer lower light intensity and that their preferences would be influenced by their housing environment. Breeder pairs of rats were randomly separated into four treatments groups: red 200 lux, red 25 lux, clear 200 lux, and clear 25 lux. The breeders' offspring were tested three times in an apparatus that offered access to each environment, and their preferences were analyzed. Generally, the rats preferred the lower-lux environments and showed no color preference. However, the rats from the clear, 200 lux cages, preferred clear caging and only showed a preference for 25 lux conditions during the second and third preference tests. These results suggest that the light intensity, more than color, should be considered when designing rodent housing and testing facilities.

Indexed as

lightpreferenceratrefinementwelfare

Identifiers

PMID39061507
PMCPMC11273897

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.