Essential 10

3. Inclusion and exclusion criteria For each analysis, report the exact value of n in each experimental group. examples


Example 1

“Group F contained 29 adult males and 58 adult females in 2010 (n = 87), and 32 adult males and 66 adult females in 2011 (n = 98). The increase in female numbers was due to maturation of juveniles to adults. Females belonged to three matrilines, and there were no major shifts in rank in the male hierarchy. Six mid to low ranking individuals died and were excluded from analyses, as were five mid-ranking males who emigrated from the group at the beginning of 2011.” [1] 

Example 2

“The proportion of test time that animals spent interacting with the handler (sniffed the gloved hand or tunnel, made paw contact, climbed on, or entered the handling tunnel) was measured from DVD recordings. This was then averaged across the two mice in each cage as they were tested together and their behaviour was not independent…Mice handled with the home cage tunnel spent a much greater proportion of the test interacting with the handler (mean ± s.e.m., 39.8 ± 5.2 percent time of 60 s test, n = 8 cages) than those handled by tail (6.4 ± 2.0 percent time, n = 8 cages), while those handled by cupping showed intermediate levels of voluntary interaction (27.6 ± 7.1 percent time, n = 8 cages).” [2] 

  1. Brent LJ, Heilbronner SR, Horvath JE, Gonzalez-Martinez J, Ruiz-Lambides A, Robinson AG, Skene JH and Platt ML (2013). Genetic origins of social networks in rhesus macaques. Scientific reports. doi: 10.1038/srep01042
  2. Gouveia K and Hurst JL (2017). Optimising reliability of mouse performance in behavioural testing: the major role of non-aversive handling. Scientific reports. doi: 10.1038/srep44999