2021
DOI: 10.1186/s11689-020-09353-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Controlling litter effects to enhance rigor and reproducibility with rodent models of neurodevelopmental disorders

Abstract: Research with rodents is crucial for expanding our understanding of genetic and environmental risk factors for neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). However, there is growing concern about the number of animal studies that are difficult to replicate, potentially undermining the validity of results. These concerns have prompted funding agencies and academic journals to implement more rigorous standards in an effort to increase reproducibility in research. However, these standards fail to address a major source of… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
57
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 65 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
57
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Experiment 1a used male and female pups obtained from 11 litters, including as much as possible all three genotypes ( CB1 −/− , CB1 +/− , and CB1 +/+ ) . The approach used here, including a high number of litters together with the use of WT and mutant littermates and testing all litter members without sampling, has been suggested as the most appropriate to protect from the risk of false positives related to litter effects, by past (Chiarotti et al, 1987; Zorrilla, 1997) and recent (Jimenez & Zylka, 2021) guidelines on mouse neurodevelopmental studies. On PND 4 pups were marked after testing by paw tattoo, using a non‐toxic odor‐less tattoo ink (Ketchum permanent Tattoo Inks green paste, Ketchum MFG.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Experiment 1a used male and female pups obtained from 11 litters, including as much as possible all three genotypes ( CB1 −/− , CB1 +/− , and CB1 +/+ ) . The approach used here, including a high number of litters together with the use of WT and mutant littermates and testing all litter members without sampling, has been suggested as the most appropriate to protect from the risk of false positives related to litter effects, by past (Chiarotti et al, 1987; Zorrilla, 1997) and recent (Jimenez & Zylka, 2021) guidelines on mouse neurodevelopmental studies. On PND 4 pups were marked after testing by paw tattoo, using a non‐toxic odor‐less tattoo ink (Ketchum permanent Tattoo Inks green paste, Ketchum MFG.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The animal data were analyzed by using the litter as the statistical unit to minimize potential confounds associated with the litter effect. All offspring were used for each litter and analyzed by applying the nonlinear mixed-effects model approach ( Jiménez and Zylka 2021 ). For studies with human urine samples, the differences between groups were compared using the Mann-Whitney test.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…values of offspring in each litter were averaged to represent one sample. This allowed us to control for large differences between litters if they existed (Jiménez and Zylka 2021 ). Based on our previous findings we estimate 5.8, 5.8, 7.2 pups/litter for VEH/CON, L-DE-71 and H-DE-71, respectively, with no differences in the secondary sex ratio (Kozlova et al 2020 ).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%