Guidelines for planning and conducting high-quality research and testing on animals

Smith, A. J.

doi:10.1186/s42826-020-00054-0

Cited by 47 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Recently concluded and published results of cancer reproducibility project highlights many of these issues (Editorial, 2021;Mullard, 2021). Working with animals requires consideration of many more issues which are critical for the validity of an experiment (Smith, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of Environment and Experimenter in Reproducibility of Behavioral Studies With Laboratory Mice

Nigri

Åhlgren

Wolfer

et al. 2022

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral phenotyping of mice has received a great deal of attention during the past three decades. However, there is still a pressing need to understand the variability caused by environmental and biological factors, human interference, and poorly standardized experimental protocols. The inconsistency of results is often attributed to the inter-individual difference between the experimenters and environmental conditions. The present work aims to dissect the combined influence of the experimenter and the environment on the detection of behavioral traits in two inbred strains most commonly used in behavioral genetics due to their contrasting phenotypes, the C57BL/6J and DBA/2J mice. To this purpose, the elevated O-maze, the open field with object, the accelerating rotarod and the Barnes maze tests were performed by two experimenters in two diverse laboratory environments. Our findings confirm the well-characterized behavioral differences between these strains in exploratory behavior, motor performance, learning and memory. Moreover, the results demonstrate how the experimenter and the environment influence the behavioral tests with a variable-dependent effect, often with mutually exclusive contributions. In this context, our study highlights how both the experimenter and the environment can have an impact on the strain effect size without altering the direction of the conclusions. Importantly, the general agreement on the results is reached by converging evidence from multiple measures addressing the same trait. In conclusion, the present work elucidates the contribution of both the experimenter and the laboratory environment in the intricate field of reproducibility in mouse behavioral phenotyping.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of Environment and Experimenter in Reproducibility of Behavioral Studies With Laboratory Mice

Nigri

Åhlgren

Wolfer

et al. 2022

Front. Behav. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The PREPARE (Planning Research and Experimental Procedures on Animals: Recommendations for Excellence) checklist suggests that the quality of scientific result is dependent upon planning and conducting [ 7 ]. In addition, transparent reporting of research findings is essential for the reproducibility of animal study, resulting in the realization of the scientific benefits to society as the ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) guidelines suggest [ 8 ].…”

Section: Main Textmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ‘R’ principles in laboratory animal experiments

Lee

Kang

2020

Lab Anim Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the Three Rs of replacement, reduction and refinement was proposed by Russel and Birch in 1959, researchers have a moral duty to minimize harm to animals. Even though animal experiments are performed by the Three Rs concept, animal researches which do not comply with international rules and standards are not accepted as well. As animal welfare has been important global issues, the methods to assess animal welfare compromise and distress have been proposed. Humanity is accepted as the goal of the Three Rs, however, another fourth R, ‘Refusal’ of fruitless protocol or ‘Responsibility’ for the experimental animal and social, scientific status of the animal experiments has been proposed. After establishing goals of animal research in a respective society, reliable knowledge can be obtained while improving laboratory animal welfare.

show abstract

“…However, this could not be directly modified by the use of tissue engineering (TE), which is the present subject. Many good reviews treat this subject [ 37 , 38 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovative Human Three-Dimensional Tissue-Engineered Models as an Alternative to Animal Testing

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal testing has long been used in science to study complex biological phenomena that cannot be investigated using two-dimensional cell cultures in plastic dishes. With time, it appeared that more differences could exist between animal models and even more when translated to human patients. Innovative models became essential to develop more accurate knowledge. Tissue engineering provides some of those models, but it mostly relies on the use of prefabricated scaffolds on which cells are seeded. The self-assembly protocol has recently produced organ-specific human-derived three-dimensional models without the need for exogenous material. This strategy will help to achieve the 3R principles.

show abstract

Guidelines for planning and conducting high-quality research and testing on animals

Cited by 47 publications

References 27 publications

Role of Environment and Experimenter in Reproducibility of Behavioral Studies With Laboratory Mice

Role of Environment and Experimenter in Reproducibility of Behavioral Studies With Laboratory Mice

The ‘R’ principles in laboratory animal experiments

Innovative Human Three-Dimensional Tissue-Engineered Models as an Alternative to Animal Testing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About