Heterogenising study samples across testing time improves reproducibility of behavioural data.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 06 2019
03 06 2019
Historique:
received:
28
02
2019
accepted:
20
05
2019
entrez:
5
6
2019
pubmed:
5
6
2019
medline:
21
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The ongoing debate on the reproducibility crisis in the life sciences highlights the need for a rethinking of current methodologies. Since the trend towards ever more standardised experiments is at risk of causing highly idiosyncratic results, an alternative approach has been suggested to improve the robustness of findings, particularly from animal experiments. This concept, referred to as "systematic heterogenisation", postulates increased external validity and hence, improved reproducibility by introducing variation systematically into a single experiment. However, the implementation of this concept in practice requires the identification of suitable heterogenisation factors. Here we show that the time of day at which experiments are conducted has a significant impact on the reproducibility of behavioural differences between two mouse strains, C57BL/6J and DBA/2N. Specifically, we found remarkably varying strain effects on anxiety, exploration, and learning, depending on the testing time, i.e. morning, noon or afternoon. In a follow-up simulation approach, we demonstrate that the systematic inclusion of two different testing times significantly improved reproducibility between replicate experiments. Our results emphasise the potential of time as an effective and easy-to-handle heterogenisation factor for single-laboratory studies. Its systematic variation likely improves reproducibility of research findings and hence contributes to a fundamental issue of experimental design and conduct in laboratory animal science.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31160667
doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-44705-2
pii: 10.1038/s41598-019-44705-2
pmc: PMC6547843
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
8247Références
ILAR J. 2014;55(3):383-91
pubmed: 25541540
Nat Methods. 2013 May;10(5):374
pubmed: 23629412
Nat Methods. 2017 Apr 27;14(5):462-464
pubmed: 28448068
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Jan 27;16:11
pubmed: 26817696
PLoS Med. 2010 Mar 30;7(3):e1000245
pubmed: 20361020
Behav Res Methods. 2007 May;39(2):175-91
pubmed: 17695343
Genes Brain Behav. 2002 Jan;1(1):3-8
pubmed: 12886944
PLoS Biol. 2015 Oct 13;13(10):e1002273
pubmed: 26460723
Pharmacol Ther. 1990;46(3):321-40
pubmed: 2188266
Trends Pharmacol Sci. 2016 Jul;37(7):509-510
pubmed: 27211784
Lab Anim. 2018 Apr;52(2):135-141
pubmed: 28771074
PLoS Biol. 2018 Feb 22;16(2):e2003693
pubmed: 29470495
Circ Res. 2015 Jan 2;116(1):116-26
pubmed: 25552691
Behav Pharmacol. 1993 Dec;4(6):637-644
pubmed: 11224232
Nat Methods. 2013 May;10(5):373-4
pubmed: 23629410
Annu Rev Psychol. 1999;50:599-624
pubmed: 10074687
Behav Brain Res. 2001 Nov 1;125(1-2):3-12
pubmed: 11682087
Behav Genet. 2006 Jul;36(4):536-52
pubmed: 16619134
Nature. 2016 May 25;533(7604):452-4
pubmed: 27225100
PLoS Biol. 2010 Jun 29;8(6):e1000412
pubmed: 20613859
Lab Anim (NY). 2017 Aug 31;46(9):343-349
pubmed: 29296016
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2004 Jul;5(7):545-52
pubmed: 15208696
Lab Anim (NY). 2017 Mar 22;46(4):164-166
pubmed: 28328898
Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 1980 Aug;13(2):167-70
pubmed: 6106204
PLoS Biol. 2016 Dec 2;14(12):e2000598
pubmed: 27911892
PLoS One. 2016 Feb 10;11(2):e0147215
pubmed: 26863229
Br J Pharmacol. 2010 Aug;160(7):1577-9
pubmed: 20649561
Nat Methods. 2009 Apr;6(4):257-61
pubmed: 19333241
Science. 1999 Jun 4;284(5420):1670-2
pubmed: 10356397
Nat Methods. 2010 Mar;7(3):167-8
pubmed: 20195246
PLoS Biol. 2014 Jan;12(1):e1001756
pubmed: 24409096
Front Psychol. 2013 Nov 26;4:863
pubmed: 24324449
Nat Genet. 2000 Nov;26(3):263
pubmed: 11062457
PLoS Biol. 2015 Jun 09;13(6):e1002165
pubmed: 26057340
PLoS Biol. 2017 Sep 28;15(9):e2003779
pubmed: 28957312