Reproducibility and replicability of rodent phenotyping in preclinical studies

Neri Kafkafi, Joseph Agassi, Elissa J Chesler, John C Crabbe, Wim E Crusio, David Eilam, Robert Gerlai, Ilan Golani, Alex Gomez-Marin, Ruth Heller, Fuad Iraqi, Iman Jaljuli, Natasha A Karp, Hugh Morgan, George Nicholson, Donald W Pfaff, Helene S Richter, Philip B Stark, Oliver Stiedl, Victoria Stodden, Lisa M Tarantino, Valter Tucci, William Valdar, Robert W Williams, Hanno Wurbel, Yoav Benjamini
. 2016-10-05; :
DOI: 10.1101/079350


The scientific community is increasingly concerned with cases of published “discoveries” that are not replicated in further studies. The field of mouse behavioral phenotyping was one of the first to raise this concern, and to relate it to other complicated methodological issues: the complex interaction between genotype and environment; the definitions of behavioral constructs; and the use of the mouse as a model animal for human health and disease mechanisms. In January 2015, researchers from various disciplines including genetics, behavior genetics, neuroscience, ethology, statistics and bioinformatics gathered in Tel Aviv University to discuss these issues. The general consent presented here was that the issue is prevalent and of concern, and should be addressed at the statistical, methodological and policy levels, but is not so severe as to call into question the validity and the usefulness of model organisms as a whole. Well-organized community efforts, coupled with improved data and metadata sharing, were agreed by all to have a key role to play in identifying specific problems and promoting effective solutions. As replicability is related to validity and may also affect generalizability and translation of findings, the implications of the present discussion reach far beyond the issue of replicability of mouse phenotypes but may be highly relevant throughout biomedical research.

Know more about