Identifying reliable traits across laboratory mouse exploration arenas: A meta-analysis

This study is a meta-analysis of 367 mice from a collection of behaviour neuroscience and behaviour genetic studies run in the same lab in Zurich, Switzerland. We employed correlation-based statistics to confirm and quantify consistencies in behaviour across the testing environments. All 367 mice ran exactly the same behavioural arenas: the light/dark box, the null maze, the open field arena, an emergence task and finally an object exploration task. We analysed consistency of three movement types across those arenas (resting, scanning, progressing), and their relative preference for three zones of the arenas (home, transition, exploration). Results were that 5/6 measures showed strong individual-differences consistency across the tests. Mean inter-arena correlations for these five measures ranged from +.12 to +.53. Unrotated principal component factor analysis (UPCFA) and Cronbach’s alpha measures showed these traits to be reliable and substantial (32-63% of variance across the five arenas). UPCFA loadings then indicate which tasks give the best information about these cross-task traits. One measure (that of time spent in “intermediate” zones) was not reliable across arenas. Conclusions centre on the use of individual differences research and behavioural batteries to revise understandings of what measures in one task predict for behaviour in others. Developing better behaviour measures also makes sound scientific and ethical sense

Debunking the myths about British science after an EU exit

In this extract from their evidence to the House of Lords Select Committee on Science and Technology, Dr Mike Galsworthy (left) and Dr Rob Davidson explore the relationship between EU membership and the effectiveness of science, research and innovation in the UK

Brexit is damaging UK science already. Here is a plan to fix it

British science and technology are already haemorrhaging talent and collaborations because of the Brexit vote, write Mike Galsworthy (left) and Rob Davidson of Scientists for EU. The government’s promise to underwrite Horizon 2020 funding was a bare minimum and uncertainty about future funding has made the UK a much less attractive place for research. They present an eight-point plan to limit damage to UK science and put its knowledge economy back in contention

Sex differences in early verbal and non-verbal cognitive development

The present study of over 3000 2-year-old twin pairs used a sex-limitation model to examine genetic and environmental origins of sex differences in verbal and non-verbal cognitive ability. Girls scored significantly higher on both measures (p < 0.0001), although gender only accounted for approximately 3% of the variance in verbal ability and 1% of the variance in non-verbal cognitive ability. For the verbal measure boys showed greater heritability than girls. Also the twin-pair correlation is significantly lower for opposite-sex twins than for non-identical same-sex twins. This indicates that individual differences in verbal ability include some sex-specific factors. Non-verbal cognitive ability did not differ in aetiology for boys and girls. We conclude that genetic and environmental influences differ for girls and boys for early verbal but not non-verbal development

Difficulties of tracing health research funded by the European Union

Objective: European Union (EU) information from research projects, including key findings, should be available on the European Commission's Community Research and Development Information Service (CORDIS) database. We describe the results of the Health Research for Europe (HR4E) project which aimed to synthesize results of health research from the EU's Fifth and Sixth Framework Programmes (FP5 and FP6) of research. Methods: Screening of titles and abstracts of all projects funded within FP5 and FP6 to identify health-related projects followed by allocation of such projects to one of the 47 themes of the European Union's Health Portal. Extraction of key findings relevant for policy and practice from data on the CORDIS database and, in a subset of 182 projects selected from five themes, attempted contact with project co-ordinators to obtain missing information. Results: The information held on CORDIS was inadequate, with many fields not completed. Data were rarely updated after the project had been funded. Of the 182 attempts to contact co-ordinators, useful information was obtained in only 17% of cases, with many contact details missing or unverifiable. Conclusions: CORDIS does not meet its stated objectives of facilitating and disseminating EU research. There is a clear need to review the systems designed to manage the CORDIS platfor