Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,210

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Mouse Estrous Cycle Identification Tool and Images

Open access
Byers, Shannon L., Wiles, Michael V., Dunn, Sadie L., Taft, Robert A.·2012·PLoS ONE

Abstract

The efficiency of producing timed pregnant or pseudopregnant mice can be increased by identifying those in proestrus or estrus. Visual observation of the vagina is the quickest method, requires no special equipment, and is best used when only proestrus or estrus stages need to be identified. Strain to strain differences, especially in coat color can make it difficult to determine the stage of the estrous cycle accurately by visual observation. Presented here are a series of images of the vaginal opening at each stage of the estrous cycle for 3 mouse strains of different coat colors: black (C57BL/6J), agouti (CByB6F1/J) and albino (BALB/cByJ). When all 4 stages (proestrus, estrus, metestrus, and diestrus) need to be identified, vaginal cytology is regarded as the most accurate method. An identification tool is presented to aid the user in determining the stage of estrous when using vaginal cytology. These images and descriptions are an excellent resource for learning how to determine the stage of the estrous cycle by visual observation or vaginal cytology.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0035538

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.

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

Metadata

Authors
Byers, S. L., Wiles, M. V., Dunn, S. L., & Taft, R. A.
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2012-04-13
Volume
7
Issue
4
Pages
e35538
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2096790979
Cited by
1,210
References
0
FWCI
32.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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

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.