Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 237

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Heritability of nociception II. ‘Types’ of nociception revealed by genetic correlation analysis

Mogil, Jeffrey S, Wilson, Sonya G, Bon, Karine, Eun Lee, Seo, Chung, Kyungsoon, Raber, Pnina, Pieper, Jeanne O, Hain, Heather S, Belknap, John K, Hubert, Lawrence, Elmer, Greg I, Mo Chung, Jin, Devor, Marshall·1999·Pain

Abstract

Clinical pain syndromes, and experimental assays of nociception, are differentially affected by manipulations such as drug administration and exposure to environmental stress. This suggests that there are different 'types' of pain. We exploited genetic differences among inbred strains of mice in an attempt to define these primary 'types'; that is, to identify the fundamental parameters of pain processing. Eleven randomly-chosen inbred mouse strains were tested for their basal sensitivity on 12 common measures of nociception. These measures provided for a range of different nociceptive dimensions including noxious stimulus modality, location, duration and etiology, among others. Since individual members of inbred strains are identical at all genetic loci, the observation of correlated strain means in any given pair of nociceptive assays is an index of genetic correlation between these assays, and hence an indication of common physiological mediation. Obtained correlation matrices were subjected to multivariate analyses to identify constellations of nociceptive assays with common genetic mediation. This analysis revealed three major clusters of nociception: (1) baseline thermal nociception, (2) spontaneously-emitted responses to chemical stimuli, and (3) baseline mechanical sensitivity and cutaneous hypersensitivity. Many other nociceptive parameters that might a priori have been considered closely related proved to be genetically divergent.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0304-3959(98)00196-1

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 237

Metadata

Authors
Mogil, J. S., Wilson, S. G., Bon, K., Eun Lee, S., Chung, K., Raber, P., Pieper, J. O., Hain, H. S., Belknap, J. K., Hubert, L., Elmer, G. I., Mo Chung, J., & Devor, M.
Venue
Pain
Published
1999-03-01
Volume
80
Issue
1
Pages
83-93
ISSN
0304-3959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2080221942
Cited by
237
References
1
FWCI
7.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Heritability of nociception II. ‘Types’ of nociception revealed by genetic correlation analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0304-3959(98)00196-1
The paper
Mogil, J. S., Wilson, S. G., Bon, K., Eun Lee, S., Chung, K., Raber, P., Pieper, J. O., Hain, H. S., Belknap, J. K., Hubert, L., Elmer, G. I., Mo Chung, J., & Devor, M. (1999). Heritability of nociception II. ‘Types’ of nociception revealed by genetic correlation analysis. Pain. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3959(98)00196-1

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.