ArticleThe Journal of experimental biology2026
On the replicability of physiological responses.
Article in The Journal of experimental biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Science is often claimed to be amid a reproducibility crisis, as evidenced by low replicability of many classic findings across multiple fields. Yet it is not clear how widespread this purported problem is. Physiological responses have the potential for replicability issues because of laboratory-specific biases in animal maintenance as well as technically complex methodologies that are often undertaken using bespoke combinations of equipment. Here, we took advantage of a cross-laboratory manipulative study on metabolic rate to assess the replicability of food restriction effects on metabolic scaling and level. Across seven skink species from the Egernia species complex and two universities, we found these responses to be extremely replicable. The slope of the interspecific metabolic scaling relationship was near one and animals reduced their mass-independent rates of energy use by an average of 32% in response to food restriction. This response was consistent across universities. Our study highlights that well designed and replicated studies with a large effect size can indeed be replicable and showcases the value of designing studies that allow tests of replicability to be incorporated explicitly. Such studies will be particularly valuable for treatment effects that generate a small effect size.
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.