Bibliometric analysis on cannibalism/infanticide and maternal aggression towards pups in laboratory rodents.

IF 1.3 4区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES Laboratory Animals Pub Date : 2024-06-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-14 DOI:10.1177/00236772231192030
José C Bravo, Lierni Ugartemendia, Arko Barman, Ana B Rodríguez, José A Pariente, Rafael Bravo
{"title":"Bibliometric analysis on cannibalism/infanticide and maternal aggression towards pups in laboratory rodents.","authors":"José C Bravo, Lierni Ugartemendia, Arko Barman, Ana B Rodríguez, José A Pariente, Rafael Bravo","doi":"10.1177/00236772231192030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Animal welfare has evolved during the past decades to improve not only the quality of life of laboratory rodents but also the quality and reproducibility of scientific investigations. Bibliometric analysis has become an important tool to complete the current knowledge with academic databases. Our objective was to investigate whether scientific research on cannibalism/infanticide is connected with maternal aggression towards the offspring in laboratory rodents. To carry out our research, we performed a specific search for published articles on each concept. Results were analyzed in the open-source environment RStudio with the package Bibliometrix. We obtained 253 and 134 articles for the first search (cannibalism/infanticide) and the second search (maternal aggression towards the pups) respectively. We observed that the interest in infanticide/cannibalism started in the 1950s, while researchers started showing interest in maternal aggression towards the pups 30 years later. Our analyses indicated that maternal aggression had better citations in scientific literature. In addition, although our results showed some common features (e.g. oxytocin or medial preoptic area in the brain), we observed a gap between cannibalism/infanticide and maternal aggression towards the pups with only 14 published articles in common for both the searches. Therefore, we recommend researchers to combine both concepts in further investigations in the context of cannibalism for better dissemination and higher impact in laboratory rodents' welfare research.</p>","PeriodicalId":18013,"journal":{"name":"Laboratory Animals","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Laboratory Animals","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00236772231192030","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Animal welfare has evolved during the past decades to improve not only the quality of life of laboratory rodents but also the quality and reproducibility of scientific investigations. Bibliometric analysis has become an important tool to complete the current knowledge with academic databases. Our objective was to investigate whether scientific research on cannibalism/infanticide is connected with maternal aggression towards the offspring in laboratory rodents. To carry out our research, we performed a specific search for published articles on each concept. Results were analyzed in the open-source environment RStudio with the package Bibliometrix. We obtained 253 and 134 articles for the first search (cannibalism/infanticide) and the second search (maternal aggression towards the pups) respectively. We observed that the interest in infanticide/cannibalism started in the 1950s, while researchers started showing interest in maternal aggression towards the pups 30 years later. Our analyses indicated that maternal aggression had better citations in scientific literature. In addition, although our results showed some common features (e.g. oxytocin or medial preoptic area in the brain), we observed a gap between cannibalism/infanticide and maternal aggression towards the pups with only 14 published articles in common for both the searches. Therefore, we recommend researchers to combine both concepts in further investigations in the context of cannibalism for better dissemination and higher impact in laboratory rodents' welfare research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于实验室啮齿动物食人/杀婴行为和母性对幼崽攻击行为的文献计量分析。
过去几十年来,动物福利不断发展,不仅提高了实验室啮齿动物的生活质量,也提高了科学研究的质量和可重复性。文献计量分析已成为利用学术数据库完善现有知识的重要工具。我们的目的是调查有关食人/杀婴的科学研究是否与实验室啮齿动物对后代的母性攻击有关。为了开展研究,我们对每个概念的已发表文章进行了专门搜索。我们在开源环境 RStudio 中使用 Bibliometrix 软件包对结果进行了分析。在第一次搜索(食人/杀婴)和第二次搜索(母体对幼崽的攻击)中,我们分别获得了 253 篇和 134 篇文章。我们注意到,对食婴/杀婴行为的关注始于 20 世纪 50 年代,而研究人员对母性攻击幼崽行为的关注则始于 30 年后。我们的分析表明,母性攻击在科学文献中的引用率更高。此外,尽管我们的研究结果显示了一些共同特征(如催产素或大脑内侧视前区),但我们发现食人/杀婴行为与母性攻击幼崽行为之间存在差距,在这两项搜索中仅有 14 篇共同发表的文章。因此,我们建议研究人员在进一步研究食人行为时将这两个概念结合起来,以便在实验室啮齿动物福利研究中更好地传播并产生更大的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Laboratory Animals
Laboratory Animals 生物-动物学
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
64
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The international journal of laboratory animal science and welfare, Laboratory Animals publishes peer-reviewed original papers and reviews on all aspects of the use of animals in biomedical research. The journal promotes improvements in the welfare or well-being of the animals used, it particularly focuses on research that reduces the number of animals used or which replaces animal models with in vitro alternatives.
期刊最新文献
Half the price, twice the gain: How to simultaneously decrease animal numbers and increase precision with good experimental design. Heterogeneity of animal experiments and how to deal with it. How cage effects can hurt statistical analyses of completely randomized designs. Simulation methodologies to determine statistical power in laboratory animal research studies. Understanding p-values and significance.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1