Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40002982›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2025

Characterization of Reusable and Recyclable Plastic Bedding Materials for Laboratory Mice.

Dana Matzek, Bastian Popper

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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.

Dana MatzekBiomedical Center, Core Facility Animal Models, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Großhaderner Straße 9, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, Germany.
Bastian PopperBiomedical Center, Core Facility Animal Models, Faculty of Medicine, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Großhaderner Straße 9, 82152 Planegg-Martinsried, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1517-695X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The scientific community has placed increasing importance on sustainability, leading to the exploration of alternative bedding materials to the widely used aspen wood chips. Bedding plays a critical role in ensuring the wellbeing of animals and the validity of experimental outcomes. Compared to the frequently evaluated biological materials, such as corncobs or spelts, synthetic materials such as plastic granules have been less investigated. We characterized two thermostable plastic materials as an alternative bedding material in C57BL/6J and BALB/c mice. We examined the impact of those bedding alternatives on physiological parameters, behavior, health status, and cage climate in static and digitally ventilated cages as well as the possibility of a reuse cycle after reprocessing. The mouse lines showed different locomotor activity, feeding, and nestbuilding behavior on plastic granules. While ammonia levels were constantly higher in static cages than in ventilated cages, blood parameters were unaltered, and health status was maintained during the reuse procedure. We show the use of plastic granulate as bedding material for mice that has the potential for processing and recycling. Further, we show that the material is accepted differently by the lines in the preference choice test without affecting their health or hygiene status.

Indexed as

mus musculuspolycarbonatepolysulfonsynthetic bedding

Identifiers

PMID40002982
PMCPMC11851371

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.