A guide to open science practices for animal research

Abstract

Translational biomedical research relies on animal experiments and provides the underlying proof of practice for clinical trials, which places an increased duty of care on translational researchers to derive the maximum possible output from every experiment performed. The implementation of open science practices has the potential to initiate a change in research culture that could improve the transparency and quality of translational research in general, as well as increasing the audience and scientific reach of published research. However, open science has become a buzzword in the scientific community that can often miss mark when it comes to practical implementation. In this Essay, we provide a guide to open science practices that can be applied throughout the research process, from study design, through data collection and analysis, to publication and dissemination, to help scientists improve the transparency and quality of their work. As open science practices continue to evolve, we also provide an online toolbox of resources that we will update continually.

Accentuating the positive and eliminating the negative: Efficacy of TiO2 as digestibility index marker for poultry nutrition studies

“…In contrast, use of TiO 2 as a digestibility index marker in the animal feed industry is longstanding [ 3 ]. A recent study conducted a meta-analysis of open science practice in animal research [ 20 ] and cited the reluctance and/or difficulty in publishing ‘negative’ or null-hypothesis results as a structural problem of scientific publishing, particularly in animal research. While TiO 2 remains a digestibility index marker of choice in animal feeding trials in poultry and swine following studies showing its ease of measurement and reduced risk compared to Cr [ 21 , 22 ], supported by a body of global feeding trial studies containing its use [reviewed, 3], studies such as this may offer reassurance of the efficacy of approach in reporting this ‘negative’ result.…”

A minimal metadata set (MNMS) to repurpose nonclinical in vivo data for biomedical research

“…To draw more awareness to concepts of validity, robustness and reproducibility (see definition in Box 1 ), the 3Rs principles have since been expanded to include the responsible use of animal research 7 – 9 . Open research practices, data sharing and FAIR (Findable Accessible Interoperable and Reusable; see also definition in Box 1 ) principles are complementary solutions that have been proposed to increase transparency and reproducibility 10 . Domain-specific solutions to assist researchers in creating datasets from their animal experiments have also been established.…”

Embracing prospects for reducing the numbers of animals used in aquaculture research

“…In our example, this has not been an issue, although we do acknowledge that each case requires different ways of actions, and there is a certain level of collegial trust involved. In addition, combining animal trials has economic advantages through reduced cost expenditures, increasing the possibilities for a budget that may cover a broader analytical spectrum, thus maximizing the utility of each study and the impacts of the results it generates (Eggel & Würbel, 2021; Diederich et al, 2022). Also, addressing similar but different hypothesis in a single trial may increase the number of analytical approaches applied.…”