ReviewNeurotoxicology and teratology
Inconsistencies in variable reporting and methods in larval zebrafish behavioral assays.
Review in Neurotoxicology and teratology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Neurobehavioral effects of fungicides in zebrafish: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Leveraging developmental neurotoxicity data in zebrafish embryos through the use of artificial intelligence methods.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Article
- Refining methodological approaches for analysing higher-throughput locomotor behaviour, using generalized additive mixed models.Frontiers in toxicology · 2026Article
- Experimental reporting of fish transcriptomic responses in environmental toxicology and ecotoxicology.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2025Review
- Review
- Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
New approaches in developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) screening are needed due to the tens of thousands of chemicals requiring hazard assessments. Zebrafish (Danio rerio) are an alternative vertebrate model for DNT testing, but without a standardized protocol for larval behavioral assays, comparison of results among laboratories is challenging. To evaluate the congruence of protocols across laboratories, we conducted a literature review of DNT studies focusing on larval zebrafish behavior assays and cataloged experimental design consistencies. Our review focused on 51 unique method variables in publications where chemical exposure occurred in early development and subsequent larval locomotor evaluation focused on assays that included a light/dark photoperiod transition. We initially identified 94 publications, but only 31 exclusively met our inclusion criteria which focused on parameters that are important to an assay employed by our laboratory. No publication reported 100% of the targeted variables; only 51 to 86% of those variables were reported in the reviewed publications, with some aspects of the experimental design consistent among laboratories. However, no protocol was exactly the same for any two publications. Many of these variables had more than one parameter/design reported, highlighting the inconsistencies among methods. Overall, there is not only a strong need for the development of a standardized testing protocol for larval zebrafish locomotor assays, but there is also a need for a standardized protocol for reporting experimental variables in the literature. Here we include an extensive guideline checklist for conducting larval zebrafish developmental behavior assays.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.