Source Paper
Silvia Mandillo, Valter Tucci, Sabine M. Hölter, Hamid Meziane, Mumna Al Banchaabouchi et al.
Physiological Genomics • 2008
Establishing standard operating procedures (SOPs) as tools for the analysis of behavioral phenotypes is fundamental to mouse functional genomics. It is essential that the tests designed provide reliable measures of the process under investigation but most importantly that these are reproducible across both time and laboratories. For this reason, we devised and tested a set of SOPs to investigate mouse behavior. Five research centers were involved across France, Germany, Italy, and the UK in this study, as part of the EUMORPHIA program. All the procedures underwent a cross-validation experimental study to investigate the robustness of the designed protocols. Four inbred reference strains (C57BL/6J, C3HeB/FeJ, BALB/cByJ, 129S2/SvPas), reflecting their use as common background strains in mutagenesis programs, were analyzed to validate these tests. We demonstrate that the operating procedures employed, which includes open field, SHIRPA, grip-strength, rotarod, Y-maze, prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle response, and tail flick tests, generated reproducible results between laboratories for a number of the test output parameters. However, we also identified several uncontrolled variables that constitute confounding factors in behavioral phenotyping. The EUMORPHIA SOPs described here are an important start-point for the ongoing development of increasingly robust phenotyping platforms and their application in large-scale, multicentre mouse phenotyping programs.
Objective: Standardized phenotypic assessment of neurological and behavioral parameters in mice as part of a cross-laboratory validation study
This is a SHIRPA Test protocol using mouse as the model organism. The procedure involves 5 procedural steps, 7 equipment items. Extracted from a 2008 paper published in Physiological Genomics.
Model and subjects
mouse • Four inbred reference strains: C57BL/6J, C3HeB/FeJ, BALB/cByJ, 129S2/SvPas • unknown • Not specified • Not specified
Study window
Estimated timing pending
Core workflow
Establish Standard Operating Procedures • Conduct SHIRPA Test • Conduct Additional Behavioral Tests
Primary readouts
Key equipment and reagents
Verified items
0
Direct vendor links
0
Use this page as an execution guide, then fall back to the source paper whenever you need exact exclusions, dosing details, or assay-specific caveats.
Confirm first
Use the page like this
Start here. The step list is optimized for running the experiment, with direct vendor links available inline when you need to source a cited item.
Devise and test a set of SOPs to investigate mouse behavior across five research centers in France, Germany, Italy, and the UK as part of the EUMORPHIA program
Note: Cross-validation experimental study to investigate robustness of designed protocols
“we devised and tested a set of SOPs to investigate mouse behavior. Five research centers were involved across France, Germany, Italy, and the UK”
Perform SHIRPA (Standardized SHIRPA and Research Profile Assessment) as part of the test battery for phenotypic assessment
Note: SHIRPA is one of the operating procedures employed in the test battery
“the operating procedures employed, which includes open field, SHIRPA, grip-strength, rotarod, Y-maze, prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle response, and tail flick tests”
Perform complementary tests including open field, grip-strength, rotarod, Y-maze, prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle response, and tail flick tests
Note: All tests conducted as part of standardized test battery
“the operating procedures employed, which includes open field, SHIRPA, grip-strength, rotarod, Y-maze, prepulse inhibition of acoustic startle response, and tail flick tests”
Test C57BL/6J, C3HeB/FeJ, BALB/cByJ, and 129S2/SvPas strains to validate the test procedures
Note: Four inbred reference strains selected as they reflect common background strains in mutagenesis programs
“Four inbred reference strains (C57BL/6J, C3HeB/FeJ, BALB/cByJ, 129S2/SvPas), reflecting their use as common background strains in mutagenesis programs, were analyzed”
Validate reproducibility of test results across multiple laboratories to identify robust output parameters and confounding variables
Note: Study generated reproducible results between laboratories for a number of test output parameters but identified several uncontrolled variables
“generated reproducible results between laboratories for a number of the test output parameters. However, we also identified several uncontrolled variables that constitute confounding factors”
This section explains what the experiment is doing, which readouts matter, what the data artifacts usually look like, and how the analysis should flow from raw capture to reported result.
Standardized phenotypic assessment of neurological and behavioral parameters in mice as part of a cross-laboratory validation study
Objective
Standardized phenotypic assessment of neurological and behavioral parameters in mice as part of a cross-laboratory validation study
Subjects
From papermouse • Four inbred reference strains: C57BL/6J, C3HeB/FeJ, BALB/cByJ, 129S2/SvPas • unknown • Not specified • Not specified
Cohort notes
From paperFour inbred reference strains reflecting their use as common background strains in mutagenesis programs
Establish Standard Operating Procedures (Not specified)
Conduct SHIRPA Test (Not specified)
Conduct Additional Behavioral Tests (Not specified)
Analyze Four Inbred Reference Strains (Not specified)
Neurological parameters assessed by SHIRPA
From paperNot specified in the provided text
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Behavioral parameters assessed by SHIRPA
From paperNot specified in the provided text
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Open field behavior measurements
From paperNot specified in the provided text
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Grip strength measurements
From paperNot specified in the provided text
Artifact type
Endpoint measurements summarized by group or timepoint
Comparison focus
Compare endpoint magnitude between groups, timepoints, or both
Neurological parameters assessed by SHIRPA
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Behavioral parameters assessed by SHIRPA
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Open field behavior measurements
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Grip strength measurements
From paperRaw artifact
Per-sample or per-animal endpoint measurements collected during the experiment
Processed artifact
Structured table with cleaned measurements ready for comparison
Final reported form
Summary statistics and between-group or across-timepoint comparisons
Acquisition
Collect raw experimental outputs with enough metadata to preserve sample identity, condition, and timing.
Preprocessing / cleaning
Not specified in the provided text
Scoring or quantification
Quantify the primary readouts for this experiment: Neurological parameters assessed by SHIRPA; Behavioral parameters assessed by SHIRPA; Open field behavior measurements; Grip strength measurements.
Statistical comparison
Statistical method not yet structured for this page.
Reporting output
Report representative outputs alongside summary comparisons for Neurological parameters assessed by SHIRPA, Behavioral parameters assessed by SHIRPA, Open field behavior measurements, Grip strength measurements.
Source links and direct wording from the methods section for validation and deeper review.
Citation
Silvia Mandillo et al. (2008). Reliability, robustness, and reproducibility in mouse behavioral phenotyping: a cross-laboratory study. Physiological Genomics
“”
“”
“”
“”
Direct vendor pages are linked from the protocol above. This section stays focused on the full comparison view and the prep checklist.
Gather these items before starting the experiment. Check off items as you prepare.
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
Not specified • Not specified • Not specified • Not specified
4 items with ReplicateScience direct pages
Estimated: $4,900.00
Use this section as the page quality checkpoint. It keeps section navigation, evidence access, readiness, and verification meaning in one place.
Current status surfaces were computed from experiment data updated Feb 28, 2026.
Source access
Jump back into the original paper or the methods evidence section when you need exact wording, exclusions, or method-specific caveats.
This protocol has structured steps plus evidence quotes, and is ready for canonical sync.
Steps
5
Evidence Quotes
12
Protocol Items
7
Linked Products
4
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this means
The completeness score reflects how much structured protocol data is present: steps, methods evidence, listed materials, linked products, and paper provenance.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Feb 28, 2026.
Canonical Sync shows whether a ConductGraph-backed protocol is available for this experiment route right now. It is a sync-status signal, not a claim that every downstream vendor link or step detail is perfect.
Steps
5
Evidence
12
Specific Products
4/4
Canonical Sync
Pending
What this score means
The verification score reflects evidence coverage, subject detail, paper provenance, step depth, and whether linked products resolve to specific item pages instead of generic searches.
Computed from the current experiment record updated Feb 28, 2026.
A page can have structured steps and still need review when evidence is thin, product links are generic, or canonical protocol coverage is still pending.