Impact of temporal variation on design and analysis of mouse knockout phenotyping studies

PLoS ONE

Volumn 9, Issue 10, 2014, Pages

  Karp, Natasha A ^a   Speak, Anneliese O ^a   White, Jacqueline K ^a   Adams, David J ^a   De Angelis, Martin Hrabé ^b,c,d   Hérault, Yann ^e   Mott, Richard F ^f  

^a WELLCOME TRUST SANGER INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

^b INSTITUTE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY   (Germany)

^c TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^d GERMAN CENTER FOR DIABETES RESEARCH DZD   (Germany)

^e INSTITUT CLINIQUE DE LA SOURIS   (France)

^f UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BATCH PROCESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA SYNTHESIS; EVALUATION STUDY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; GENE INACTIVATION; GENETIC DATABASE; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; PHENOTYPIC VARIATION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TEMPORAL ANALYSIS; WORKFLOW; ANIMAL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; KNOCKOUT MOUSE; METABOLISM; METHODOLOGY; REPRODUCIBILITY; TIME;

CHLORIDE;

ANIMALS; CHLORIDES; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MICE, KNOCKOUT; PHENOTYPE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 84908530379     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111239     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Crabbe JC, Wahlsten D, Dudek BC (1999) Genetics of mouse behavior: interactions with laboratory environment. Science 284: 1670-1672.
2. Paylor R (2009) Questioning standardization in science. Nat Methods 6: 253-254.
3. Richter SH, Garner JP, Wurbel H (2009) Environmental standardization: cure or cause of poor reproducibility in animal experiments? Nat Methods 6: 257-261.
4. Brown SD, Moore MW (2012) Towards an encyclopaedia of mammalian gene function: the International Mouse Phenotyping Consortium. Dis Model Mech 5: 289-292.
5. Ringwald M, Iyer V, Mason JC, Stone KR, Tadepally HD, et al. (2011) The IKMC web portal: a central point of entry to data and resources from the International Knockout Mouse Consortium. Nucleic Acids Research 39: D849-855.
6. Collins FS (2007) A mouse for all reasons. Cell 128: 9-13.
7. Skarnes WC, Rosen B, West AP, Koutsourakis M, Bushell W, et al. (2011) A conditional knockout resource for the genome-wide study of mouse gene function. Nature 474: 337-U361.
8. Brown SD, Hancock JM, Gates H (2006) Understanding mammalian genetic systems: the challenge of phenotyping in the mouse. PLoS Genet 2: e118.
9. Brown SD, Wurst W, Kuhn R, Hancock JM (2009) The functional annotation of mammalian genomes: the challenge of phenotyping. Annu Rev Genet 43: 305-333.
10. Karp NA, Melvin D, Project SMG, Mott R (2012) Robust and Sensitive Analysis of Mouse Knockout Phenotypes. PLoS ONE 7: e52410.
11. White JK, Gerdin AK, Karp NA, Ryder E, Buljan M, et al. (2013) Genomewide Generation and Systematic Phenotyping of Knockout Mice Reveals New Roles for Many Genes. Cell 154: 452-464.
12. Team RDC (2008) R: A language and environment for statistical computing.: R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
13. Ihaka R, Gentleman R (1996) R: A Language for Data Analysis and Graphics. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 5: 299-314.