Female rodents in behavioral neuroscience: Narrative review on the methodological pitfalls

• Published in: Physiology & behavior Vol. 284; p. 114645
• Main Authors: Becegato, Marcela, Silva, Regina H.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.10.2024
• Subjects: behavior; estrous cycle; females; issues and policy; Methodology; neurophysiology; Oophorectomy; ovariectomy; Sex differences; Sexism; Vaginal lavage; Vaginal lavage; Sex differences; Methodology; Sexism; Oophorectomy
• ISSN: 0031-9384; 1873-507X; 1873-507X
• DOI: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2024.114645

•Less than a fifth of studies use adequate designs to compare sexes.•Monitoring and controlling the estrous cycle affect animals’ health and behavior.•Expecting females to behave as males may lead to misinterpretations.•All animal research must include both sexes to identify or rule out sex differences. Since the NIH ‘Sex as biological variable’ policy, the percentage of studies including female subjects have increased largely. Nonetheless, many researchers fail to adequate their protocols to include females. In this narrative review, we aim to discuss the methodological pitfalls of the inclusion of female rodents in behavioral neuroscience. We address three points to consider in studies: the manipulations conducted only in female animals (such as estrous cycle monitoring, ovariectomy, and hormone replacement), the consideration of males as the standard, and biases related to interpretation and publication of the results. In addition, we suggest guidelines and perspectives for the inclusion of females in preclinical research.