The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Reliability, robustness, and reproducibility in mouse behavioral phenotyping: a cross-laboratory study
Open accessAbstract
Establishing standard operating procedures (SOPs) as tools for the analysis of behavioral phenotypes is fundamental to mouse functional genomics. It is essential that the tests designed provide reliable measures of the process under investigation but most importantly that these are reproducible across both time and laboratories. For this reason, we devised and tested a set of SOPs to investigate mouse behavior. Five research centers were involved across France, Germany, Italy, and the UK in this study, as part of the EUMORPHIA program. All the procedures underwent a cross-validation experimental study to investigate the robustness of the designed protocols. Four inbred reference strains (C57BL/6J, C3HeB/FeJ, BALB/cByJ, 129S2/SvPas), reflecting their use as common background strains in mutagenesis programs, were analyzed to validate these tests. We demonstrate that the operating procedures employed, which includes open field, SHIRPA, grip-strength, rotarod, Y-maze, prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle response, and tail flick tests, generated reproducible results between laboratories for a number of the test output parameters. However, we also identified several uncontrolled variables that constitute confounding factors in behavioral phenotyping. The EUMORPHIA SOPs described here are an important start-point for the ongoing development of increasingly robust phenotyping platforms and their application in large-scale, multicentre mouse phenotyping programs.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cites
The Comprehensive Knockout Mouse Project Consortium (2004) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng0904-921 · Cited by 608
The use of behavioral test batteries: Effects of training history
McIlwain, K. L., Merriweather, M. Y., Yuva-Paylor, L. A., & Paylor, R. (2001) · Physiology & Behavior · doi:10.1016/s0031-9384(01)00528-5 · Cited by 579
Behavioral phenotyping strategies for mutant mice
Crawley, J. N. (2008) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.03.001 · Cited by 439
Rogers, D. C., Peters, J., Martin, J. E., Ball, S., Nicholson, S. J., Witherden, A. S., Hafezparast, M., Latcham, J., Robinson, T. L., Quilter, C. A., et al. (2001) · Neuroscience Letters · doi:10.1016/s0304-3940(01)01885-7 · Cited by 199
Behavior and mutagenesis screens: The importance of baseline analysis of inbred strains
Tarantino, L. M., Gould, T. J., Druhan, J. P., & Bucan, M. (2000) · Mammalian Genome · doi:10.1007/s003350010107 · Cited by 158
Cited by
The metabolic footprint of aging in mice
Houtkooper, R. H., Argmann, C., Houten, S. M., Cantó, C., Jeninga, E. H., Andreux, P. A., Thomas, C., Doenlen, R., Schoonjans, K., & Auwerx, J. (2011) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep00134 · Cited by 528
Self-citationA Comprehensive Behavioral Test Battery to Assess Learning and Memory in 129S6/Tg2576 Mice
Wolf, A., Bauer, B., Abner, E. L., Ashkenazy-Frolinger, T., & Hartz, A. M. S. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0147733 · Cited by 281
“…in learning memory (Morris and radial arm water maze), working memory (alternation), object discrimination (novel object recognition), spatial memory (Morris and radial arm water maze), long-term memory (radial arm water maze), and episodic-like memory (radial arm water maze) [24, 29, 35, 51 – 53].”
BackgroundWeissbrod, A., Shapiro, A., Vasserman, G., Edry, L., Dayan, M., Yitzhaky, A., Hertzberg, L., Feinerman, O., & Kimchi, T. (2013) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms3018 · Cited by 235
Reproducibility and replicability of rodent phenotyping in preclinical studies
Kafkafi, N., Agassi, J., Chesler, E. J., Crabbe, J. C., Crusio, W. E., Eilam, D., Gerlai, R., Golani, I., Gomez-Marin, A., Heller, R., et al. (2018) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2018.01.003 · Cited by 215
Self-citationGouveia, K., & Hurst, J. L. (2017) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep44999 · Cited by 193
Metadata
- Authors
- Mandillo, S., Tucci, V., Hölter, S. M., Meziane, H., Banchaabouchi, M. A., Kallnik, M., Lad, H. V., Nolan, P. M., Ouagazzal, A.-M., Coghill, E. L., Gale, K., Golini, E., Jacquot, S., Krezel, W., Parker, A., Riet, F., Schneider, I., Marazziti, D., Auwerx, J., Brown, S. D. M., Chambon, P., Rosenthal, N., Tocchini-Valentini, G., & Wurst, W.
- Venue
- Physiological Genomics
- Publisher
- American Physiological Society
- Published
- 2008-08
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 243-255
- ISSN
- 1094-8341 (ISSN-L)
- 1531-2267
- OpenAlex
- W2145913238
- Cited by
- 282
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 21.02
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Reliability, robustness, and reproducibility in mouse behavioral phenotyping: a cross-laboratory study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1152/physiolgenomics.90207.2008
- The paper
- Mandillo, S., Tucci, V., Hölter, S. M., Meziane, H., Banchaabouchi, M. A., Kallnik, M., Lad, H. V., Nolan, P. M., Ouagazzal, A.-M., Coghill, E. L., Gale, K., Golini, E., Jacquot, S., Krezel, W., Parker, A., Riet, F., Schneider, I., Marazziti, D., Auwerx, J., . . . Wurst, W. (2008). Reliability, robustness, and reproducibility in mouse behavioral phenotyping: a cross-laboratory study. Physiological Genomics. https://doi.org/10.1152/physiolgenomics.90207.2008
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.