Birke, L.I., Arluke, A. & Michael, M. (2007). The sacrifice: How scientific experiments transform animals and people. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.Google Scholar

Broom, D.M. (2011). A history of animal welfare science. Acta Biotheoretica, 59: 121–137.Google Scholar

European Science Foundation (ESF). (2011). The European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/hi/h2020-ethics_code-of-conduct_en.pdf (accessed 12 December 2016).Google Scholar

Expert Working Group (EWG). (2014). Expert Working Group to develop a common education and training framework EC. A working document on the development of a common education and training framework to fulfil the requirements under the Directive. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/pdf/Endorsed_E-T.pdf (accessed 12 December 2016).Google Scholar

Holmberg, T. (2008). A feeling for the animal: On becoming an experimentalist. Society & Animals, 16: 316–335.Google Scholar

Ideland, M. (2009). Different views on ethics: How animal ethics is situated in a committee culture. Journal of Medical Ethics, 35: 258–261.Google Scholar

Kolar, R. & Ruhdel, I. (2007). A survey concerning the work of ethics committees and licensing authorities for animal experiments in Germany. ALTEX, 24: 326–334.Google Scholar

Lynch, M.E. (1988). Sacrifice and the transformation of the animal body into a scientific object: Laboratory culture and ritual practice in the neurosciences. Social Studies of Science, 18: 265–289.Google Scholar

Ministry of Higher Education and Science. (2014). Danish Code of Conduct for Research Integrity. http://ufm.dk/publikationer/2014/the-danish-code-of-conduct-for-research-integrity (accessed 17 February 2017).Google Scholar

Nature. (2015). Protection priority: All involved in animal research must ensure that rules for ethical experiments are observed. Nature, 525: 290.Google Scholar

PloS One. (2016). Retraction: The effect of social stress on chronic pain perception in female and male mice. PLoS ONE, 11: e0156567.Google Scholar

Raj, L. Ide, T. Gurkar, A.U. Foley, M. Schenone, M, Li, X. Tolliday, N.J. Golub, T.R. Carr, A.A. Shamji, A.F. Stern, A.M. Mandinova, A. Schreiber, S.L. & Lee, S.W. (2015). Corrigendum: Selective killing of cancer cells by a small molecule targeting the stress response to ROS. Nature, 526: 596.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

RetractionWatch. (2015). Sheep study pulled for issues with ‘the validity of data’ and ‘attribution of authorship’. http://retractionwatch.com/2015/08/11/sheep-study-pulled-for-issues-with-the-validity-of-data-and-attribution-of-authorship/#more-30416 (accessed 12 December 2016).Google Scholar

RetractionWatch. (2016). PLOS ONE paper plagiarized from 17 articles – yes, 17. http://retractionwatch.com/2016/05/31/plos-one-paper-plagiarized-from-17-articles-yes-17/#more-40553 (accessed 12 December 2016).Google Scholar

Rollin, B.E. (2006). The regulation of animal research and the emergence of animal ethics: A conceptual history. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 27: 285–304.Google Scholar

Sengupta, S. & Lo, B. (2003). The roles and experiences of nonaffiliated and non-scientist members of institutional review boards. Academic Medicine, 78: 212–218.Google Scholar

Sweeny, J.P.A. Surridge, V. Humphry, P.S. Pugh, H. & Mamo, K. (2015). Retraction notice to ‘Benefits of different urea supplementation methods on the production performances of Merino sheep’ [The Veterinary Journal 200 (2014) 398–403]. The Veterinary Journal 206, 118.Google Scholar

Tjärnström, E. (2013). Decision making and the role of empathy in animal ethics committees (AECs). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. Department of Animal Environment and Health (MSc Thesis 2013:503) http://stud.epsilon.slu.se/6325/1/Tjarnstrom_E_131216.pdfGoogle Scholar

Turgeon, B. Meloche, S. (2009). Interpreting neonatal lethal phenotypes in mouse mutants: Insights into gene function and human diseases. Physiological Reviews, 89: 1–26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

VR (The Swedish Research Council). (2011). Good Research Practice. Vetenskapsrådets Rapportserie, vol 3:2011.Google Scholar