How Telemetry Allowed To Reuse The Animal

Animals (Basel). 2014 Jun; 4(2): 361–373.

Refining Housing, Husbandry and Intendance for Animals Used in Studies Involving Biotelemetry

Received 2014 Feb 21; Revised 2014 Jun ix; Accepted 2014 Jun sixteen.

Abstruse

Unproblematic Summary

Biotelemetry, the remote detection and measurement of an animal function or action, is widely used in fauna research. Biotelemetry devices transmit physiological or behavioural information and may be surgically implanted into animals, or externally attached. This can help to reduce animal numbers and meliorate welfare, due east.g., if animals can be group housed and move freely instead of existence tethered to a recording device. Still, biotelemetry can also cause hurting and distress to animals due to surgery, attachment, single housing and long term laboratory housing. This commodity explains how welfare and science can be improved past avoiding or minimising these harms.

Abstract

Biotelemetry tin contribute towards reducing brute numbers and suffering in disciplines including physiology, pharmacology and behavioural research. However, the technique can also cause harm to animals, making biotelemetry a 'refinement that needs refining'. Current welfare issues relating to the housing and husbandry of animals used in biotelemetry studies are single vs. grouping housing, provision of environmental enrichment, long term laboratory housing and apply of telemetered information to help assess welfare. Animals may be singly housed because more than than ane device transmits on the same wavelength; due to concerns regarding impairment to surgical sites; because they are wearing exteriorised jackets; or if monitoring systems can only record from individually housed animals. Much of this tin be overcome by thoughtful experimental blueprint and surgery refinements. Similarly, if biotelemetry studies forestall sure enrichment items, husbandry refinement protocols can exist adapted to permit some ecology stimulation. Nevertheless, long-term laboratory housing raises welfare concerns and maximum durations should exist defined. Telemetered data can be used to aid assess welfare, helping to determine endpoints and refine future studies. The above measures will help to improve data quality as well as welfare, considering experimental confounds due to physiological and psychological stress volition be minimised.

Keywords: Three Rs, refinement, reduction, biotelemetry, ecology enrichment, fauna husbandry, surgery, ethical review, animal welfare, welfare assessment

ane. Introduction

The ethical controlling process for inquiry projects or procedures involving animals rests on a harm-benefit cess, in which the probable harms (pain, suffering or distress experienced by animals) are 'weighed' confronting the potential benefits of the project. This assessment may be conducted past a number of different individuals or bodies, including the regulator, an ethics committee, the researcher or a combination of these. A good harm-benefit assessment involves setting out the potential harms to animals throughout their lives, including non just scientific procedures and their later furnishings, but also other aspects that may crusade suffering such as early 'weaning', ship, husbandry restrictions (e.thousand., singly housing social animals) and some killing techniques. This arroyo also identifies opportunities to implement refinement, one of the Three Rs (Replacement of animal experiments with humane alternatives, Reduction of brute numbers to the minimum needed for statistical significance, and Refinement of animate being husbandry and procedures to reduce suffering and improve welfare). Refinement can significantly reduce harms to animals, which will conspicuously bear on on the harm-do good cess and have implications as to the justification for the project. Withal, refining i aspect of a process may accept repercussions that impact welfare in other ways, so it is essential to conduct a thoughtful review of the animal's broader life experience when making decisions about appropriate refinements and how these will be implemented.

One example of a refinement that tin can requite rise to wider welfare bug is biotelemetry, which tin be defined as the remote detection and measurement of a human or animal function, activeness or status [one]. The get-go physiological betoken telemetered from a conscious creature was recorded in 1963, when aortic blood period was successfully transmitted from an exercising boxer dog at the San Diego Zoo hospital [2]. Since so, the use of biotelemetry has expanded hugely inside a wide range of biological disciplines including physiology, pharmacology and behavioural studies in both the laboratory and field [3]. Its utilise has get and then well-established that some regulatory bodies crave data that can only be obtained using biotelemetry [4].

The use of biotelemetry to transmit physiological or behavioural data is often cited equally a way of implementing 2 of the 3 Rs; reduction and refinement. Biotelemetry can indeed reduce fauna numbers, by enabling the drove of more than, ameliorate quality information from each animal, e.one thousand., because data can be gathered over longer periods, or multiple parameters tin can exist recorded from the same private [iii,5]. Removing the need for tethers and restraint during recording, so that animals tin can comport more than commonly, is a refinement in that it can significantly reduce stress during information drove [5].

Nonetheless, despite these benefits, the application of biotelemetry can likewise be a source of harms to animals. Surgical procedures to implant internal devices can cause pain and distress, every bit can the fitting of external devices, and the size, shape and weight of the device tin can be a welfare issue in smaller species [5]. Recording multiple parameters may add together to the burden on the fauna (e.g., if multiple sensors are implanted), and holding animals in the laboratory in the long term is also a cause for concern and contend as to acceptable maximum durations. Animals may be singly housed, either during recordings or permanently, which is a significant welfare issue for social species or strains.

Taking all of this into account, the apply of biotelemetry inside each projection should in itself be subject to a harm-benefit cess, in mutual with all other invasive procedures. It is essential to recognise this and regard biotelemetry as a 'refinement that may need refining' rather than a panacea. With this in mind, the RSPCA prepare an expert Joint Working Group on Refinement (JWGR) in 2003 to produce good exercise guidance reports on procedures involving biotelemetry [5] and housing and care for animals used in such projects [6]. This was within the context of the Lodge's work to promote effective ethical review of animal utilise and implementation of the 3 Rs.

Ten years on, the use of telemetry has continued to increase, as take developments in device technology. This paper provides an update on some of the topics addressed in the JWGR on housing, husbandry and care for animals involved in biotelemetry studies. Information technology does not address device attachment or implantation, simply assumes that these volition be fully refined in accordance with legal requirements to minimise suffering by employing effective pain management [7] and current good do approaches to surgery such as the Laboratory Animal Science Association (LASA) asepsis guidelines [viii].

Likewise over the last decade, the level of debate has increased inside the scientific community about the scientific validity and translatability of many animal 'models'. Concerns that take come to the fore include the validity of 'extrapolating' betwixt species, standards of experimental blueprint and reporting, and confounding effects due to physiological and psychological responses to housing, husbandry and intendance that does not cater for animals' species-specific needs [9,ten,11,12,xiii,14]. All of these issues take profound ethical implications with respect to the bodily 'benefits' of brute research, how funding resources are spent, and whether the needs of patient groups are properly addressed. Reducing stress to animals by employing the approach to housing and care fix out in this document will thus not only help to meliorate welfare, but volition as well enhance scientific validity.

2. Housing, Husbandry and Intendance Issues Associated With Biotelemetry

A refined biotelemetry system should: allow animals to be housed in stable, compatible groups; not preclude environmental enrichment; exist minimally invasive; and would not be interfered with by other animals in the grouping. In practice, notwithstanding, internally and externally mounted devices currently both facilitate and nowadays obstacles to these standards [five,half dozen]. This is expanded upon in Section 2.1 and Department 2.2 below, which explain how to provide group housing and enrichment for animals on biotelemetry studies. Some instrumented animals are reused and housed long term, which is addressed in Section 2.3, while Section ii.iv provides examples of how available telemetered information can be used for an additional purpose: to help reduce suffering and meliorate welfare.

2.1. Group Housing

It is generally accepted that social species, including many commonly used laboratory mammals, should be housed in stable, compatible groups [7,15]. This varies with species, strain and sex, for example there is debate over the benefits of group housing hamsters and some strains of male person mice. Singly housing social species or strains is probable to have meaning negative consequences for fauna welfare and will also affect data quality, if social isolation leads to physiological responses that touch results [16,17,18,19,20,21]. Despite this, a proportion of animals used in biotelemetry studies are still singly housed. The reasons that are given for this should e'er be challenged, as many of the perceived obstacles to group housing can be overcome, every bit explained below.

Reason 1: Devices all transmit on the aforementioned wavelength. Although considerable developments accept been made in this area in contempo years, many commercially available telemetry devices still transmit at the same frequency. It is plainly incommunicable to obtain meaningful data from several devices, on different animals, that are all transmitting at the aforementioned wavelength within the same pen or cage. If the use of single wavelength devices is unavoidable, solutions include:

(1)

The 'buddy' system, in which an instrumented creature is group housed with one or more uninstrumented individuals [20,21]. The fate of the buddy (or buddies) can be planned for in advance. Potential options are: (i) rehoming; (ii) use in another study, provided that the animals are suitable (e.chiliad., of an appropriate age); or (iii) humane killing at the finish of the study. Both options (i) and (ii) may involve irresolute established groups, in which example advice from animal technologists or the attending veterinary tin can assist to reduce stress to the animals. Selection (iii) is an ethical issue, although it demand non be an animate being welfare effect if the killing technique is properly refined. The animals' tissues or organs should be used in other studies or for training purposes where appropriate, or facilities may sell surplus, euthanased animals for utilise equally nutrient for rehabilitated wildlife, raptors or 'exotic' companion animals. Some establishments have set up programmes in which surplus animals tin be certified fit and rehomed to responsible carers [22,23] and in that location is a legal framework to back up rehoming in many countries, provided that it is in the beast'due south all-time interests [7].
(2)

Devices that can be switched on and off with a magnetically actuated system in situ, i.e., post-obit implantation, and used 1 at a time in pair- or group-housed animals. This avoids the issue of deciding fates for 'ex-buddies', provided that recording data sequentially is compatible with the scientific protocol, or can exist compensated for by the experimental blueprint. Switching devices on and off tin can besides extend battery life, thus facilitating reduction in animal numbers because more information tin can be gathered from each brute (but see Section two.3 below).
(3)

Instrumenting all animals, and and then separating them for data recording sessions only. This allows data to be recorded at the aforementioned time from unlike individuals, but periods of social isolation (and being moved to a different enclosure, if applicable) will exist highly stressful for some animals, with implications for welfare and data quality [20,21]. The suitability of this approach will depend upon factors such as the species, duration of isolation and whether animals can habituate to the protocol.
(4)

Use of information logging devices instead of transmitters, where data are recorded onto a microchip and downloaded once the device has been retrieved from the animal. Information can exist retrieved following each session if external loggers are used, but in that location will clearly exist a longer look in the case of implanted loggers. Also, device failure may non be detected until the download is attempted, meaning that studies would have to be repeated.

At the fourth dimension of writing, biotelemetry device manufacturers are working on technical innovations that will further facilitate pair and group housing, so information technology is expert practise to continue up to date with developments in multi-wavelength devices and other innovations that tin reduce the touch on of telemetry on animals, due east.grand., smaller or lighter devices. A wider range of dual frequency and multi-channel devices has become bachelor; initially for large animals such as dogs, just some are now marketed as pocket-sized enough for use in rats. However, there are currently no commercially bachelor, implantable, multi-wavelength devices that are suitable for mice.

Reason two: Animals have undergone implantation surgery and are singly housed in case they impairment one another's wounds. Surgical wound failure is painful and distressing, affecting both health and welfare and requiring either repair surgery or the euthanasia of the animal. However, the negative welfare impact of changing from social to permanent single housing should not be underestimated for social species. To look at this some other way; wound harm or failure may occur, only the psychological distress due to changing to single housing will occur. In light of this, the ideal is to re-plant animals in their social groups every bit soon as possible post-obit any kind of surgery, and this should also exist the default position for biotelemetry [6].

Unlike facilities employ a variety of protocols with respect to regrouping later on implantation surgery, ranging from immediate regrouping to waiting for a period of several days. In general, animals can exist successfully regrouped afterwards 24 hours [5] if steps are taken to ensure that:

The pair or group was well-established and stable before surgery. If groups are stable before surgery, in that location is a greater run a risk of achieving harmonious regrouping subsequently. Drawing pairs or groups from littermates is an obvious choice, which should be possible whether animals are bred either in-house or externally. Good liaison with the breeder will be necessary if animals are sourced from outside the institution (liaison with whatever external convenance facilities to ensure consistency in housing and care weather is also good exercise, although if there are differences and then the aim should be to 'level upwardly' and implement the amend husbandry protocols at both).
If animals accept undergone transport to the facility, they take had an adequate settling-in catamenia to enable both recovery from whatever transport stress and acclimatisation to environmental changes and new caretakers. Absolute minimum settling-in periods before surgery have been suggested of a week for rodents, two weeks for dogs, and a calendar month for non-human primates [6]. Note that animals should be allowed a minimum post-implantation recovery flow of 2 weeks before conducting further procedures [20,21].
Surgical procedures correspond best practice with respect to asepsis, surgical approach, the competence of the surgeon and constructive welfare assessment and pain management [5,8,24]. All of these will facilitate a more rapid render to normal behaviour, including social behaviour.
Animals have recovered from anaesthesia so that they are capable of interacting appropriately with others.
Wound closure has been fully refined, for example by the apply of intradermal sutures [24]. This, together with constructive pain management and careful asepsis, will stop animals paying excessive attention to their ain wounds, reducing the risk of drawing the attention of others via visual or olfactory cues.
Housing and intendance are as well refined, including the provision of sufficient space and enrichment, which volition shift animals' attention from their own and others' wounds and allow them to retreat from one some other [6].
There is adequate supervision from carers in the initial regrouping period, and for as long as is necessary to ensure that at that place is no persistent discomfort or pain. Behavioural assessments should also bank check that animals are interacting in an acceptable way, e.g., hierarchies are appropriate and at that place is no bullying [5,25].

There may exist concerns about wound breakdown and bullying if group housing has non been usual exercise, or if there is a proposal to regroup animals earlier following surgery. In these cases, a carefully-supervised pilot study, with advice from the attention veterinarian, could be undertaken. This should include and address all of the points in the above list.

One approach to reducing whatever negative effects of single housing that might arise is 'living autonomously together', in which animals have no (or minimal) concrete contact with one another just tin can run into, hear and/or smell other animals. Visual and olfactory contact is recommended for other species such equally non-human primates, rabbits and dogs when separately housed [half dozen,26,27,28]. All the same, the benefits of this express contact tin can vary between species and strains. For case, female C57BL/6JOlaHsd mice benefit most from social housing after surgery, but if they are separated, limited contact through a grid partition is more stressful than housing them individually [29]. The literature on the effects of social vs. individual housing, including behavioural studies to evaluate whether detail species and strains benefit from limited contact, should exist regularly reviewed to ensure that protocols reflect electric current knowledge almost animal behaviour and welfare.

If single housing really is unavoidable for justifiable scientific reasons, animals should not undergo implantation surgery unless they are able to tolerate being housed on their ain. A trial period should be set upwards to appraise how well animals tin can adapt before moving on with the study.

Reason three: Animals are wearing jackets or have exteriorised devices and are singly housed in case they interfere with these. Similar issues arise when grouping housing animals with devices that are partly or entirely external as when following surgery. Some species can be group housed while fitted with external devices without issues, but with other species at that place may be concerns that animals could damage one another's jackets or devices, or that stress or injuries could occur due to excessive attending to these. The basic approaches to overcoming this are the same as those for group housing post-surgery, i.e., maintaining stable groups, refining housing and care, and ensuring appropriate supervision.

Other measures that can exist undertaken to facilitate group housing for animals with jackets, harnesses or exteriorised devices include ensuring that animals are fully habituated to the device and/or attachment, are trained to take it and are also accustomed to other animals wearing information technology. Animals may habituate to relatively large exteriorised devices if they are given the opportunity. For example, mice with headpieces measuring 15 by twenty mm take been successfully housed in groups of 12, with no injuries to the animals or significant damage to any of the devices. This was facilitated past forming and maintaining stable groups and by calculation not-working devices to the muzzle for the mice to explore and dispense. Although some of the mice tried to bite others' devices for a menstruum of 15 to twenty minutes when showtime re-grouped after the headpieces were fitted, this was not sustained and the animals quickly lost interest [30].

For studies where jackets are required, trials tin can be conducted using quondam jackets and dummy devices to help with habituation. If the only problem lies with animals undoing fastenings, these can simply exist fabricated more robust. Some animals (e.thou., some groups of dogs, particularly very immature ones) may persist in dissentious one another's jackets and/or devices, and so that it really is impossible to group business firm them. In such cases, any welfare touch on tin be reduced past minimising the duration of single housing and implementing 'living apart together' for those species that volition do good from this (encounter above). It should also be possible to let socialisation time for singly housed animals in a shared area, with adequate supervision and activities to distract from one some other's jackets. Given the wide availability and increasing use of jacketed electrocardiogram (ECG) telemetry systems in large animals, achieving group housing for these animals is a very important goal for animal welfare.

Reason 4: Muzzle-type monitoring systems that tin simply record from singly housed animals are being used. Automated, muzzle-based monitoring systems are sometimes used for behavioural monitoring, for instance in phenotyping screens or in neuroscience studies. These may operate using video, by recording food and water consumption, by recording and analysing an animal's movements within a cage placed on a sensor platform, or by a combination of these. Some of these monitoring systems cannot tape from or track multiple animals, which necessitates unmarried housing. It is somewhat paradoxical for a behavioural monitoring and characterisation system to require animal housing that is inherently stressful and liable to lead to confounding results, and then the use of such systems should be critically questioned on both animal welfare and scientific grounds.

There are some cage-based monitoring systems already available that use transponder technology to recognise individuals, or that include software capable of distinguishing betwixt animals. Where possible, these should be used in preference to those that but allow single housing. Equally with biotelemetry device engineering science, it is important to monitor ongoing developments and regularly check whether in that location is an alternative product or selection that permits group housing for social animals.

2.2. Providing Environmental Enrichment

Animals with exteriorised devices are sometimes bailiwick to restrictions on environmental enrichment for fear that they volition become entangled or entrapped in some enrichment items (e.k., some nesting materials or refuges). Concerns that animals might hurt or hurt themselves on some items can also effect in reduced provision of enrichment for animals on biotelemetry studies.

Simply removing the enrichment item is not an appropriate solution, but in some cases there may be justification for adjusting enrichment protocols on veterinary and animal welfare grounds. For example, entanglement in nesting materials tin be a real problem for rodents with head caps or cannulae, so some nesting materials would not be advisable for them. However, it is often possible to cater for the animals' needs in other means, such as providing not-tangling nesting fabric and refuges with wide entrances that are designed then that animals cannot climb on top of them and catch exteriorised devices on the muzzle roof (Figure 1).

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is animals-04-00361-g001.jpg

This nest box is designed for rats with external devices. (a) The box has a wide entrance and is bolted to the muzzle hat and then that the beast cannot move information technology. The corners are extended to meet the side of the muzzle at the front end left and back correct of the box to forbid animals from squeezing between the box and cage walls. (b) The adjusted box in situ.

Besides concerns about potential injury, some animals may exist denied enrichment (including interaction sessions with carers) in instance physiological responses to the stimulation volition touch data quality [31]. This is unlikely to be the case; it is more probable that isolation and boredom will cause more stress and serious welfare bug [6,20,21], with negative effects on the science.

2.3. Long Term Housing in the Laboratory and Reuse

Instrumented animals are oftentimes reused in biotelemetry studies, for example in guild to avoid conducting surgical procedures using naïve animals. Every bit a consequence of this, larger species such as dogs and primates may be housed in the laboratory for some time (there are legal constraints on reuse in many countries, including Member States of the European Union. These include requirements relating to the severity of the previous procedures and the health and fettle of the beast [7]). Battery life is an inevitable constraint on the duration of an animals' stay in the laboratory, but the primary consideration should exist animal welfare. Some facilities implement fixed time limits after which animals will no longer exist reused, which may run to a couple of years or, exceptionally, six years or more than. Others exercise not implement a fixed limit simply regularly review the private animals and how they answer to long term housing in the laboratory [31]. Regardless of whether time limits are in identify, it is proficient practice to monitor animals for signs that they are becoming 'institutionalised' and losing the ability to cope with their environment. An accordingly tailored welfare cess scheme, including indicators that animals are experiencing chronic adverse effects, is essential in this regard. Refining housing and care will too help to ensure that animals will exist comfortable in their surroundings in the long term [6].

Enrichment is a husbandry refinement that can besides supply additional indicators of an beast's welfare state; for example, animals who are condign depressed or uncomfortable may stop making properly constructed nests, or climbing onto platforms, or they may mostly get less interested in their enrichment items and one another. Welfare assessment protocols should be adequately tailored to animals on long-term studies and should ensure that subtle signs of suffering can be detected before more meaning welfare problems occur [25].

There is also an ethical dilemma associated with long-term housing and reuse, in which the requirement to minimise the utilize of naïve animals has to exist balanced against setting limits on the number of times animals are re-used, and on how long they should alive in research facilities. The attending veterinarian, others with fauna welfare expertise and well-informed ethics or animal care and apply committees can play a useful office in considering and weighing these issues, eastward.g., by helping to make up one's mind on humane endpoints such equally behaviours that indicate chronic distress, on absolute limits on the number of times animals are reused, or on the length of time that individuals stay at the facility. Input from the attention veterinarian is an essential part of the decision-making process, and is a legal requirement in many countries [7].

two.4. Using Telemetered Physiological or Behavioural Data to Help Assess Wellbeing

Many variables that are monitored and recorded in biotelemetry studies are likewise useful in assessing animal welfare. For example, heart rate, blood pressure and body temperature can all act as indicators that animals may be experiencing pain, suffering or distress, in conjunction with other criteria such every bit behaviour, body weight, etc. Physiological data tin be obtained from animals with devices in place for scientific purposes (so there are no additional harms to experimental subjects) and used to evaluate the impact of disturbances (e.g., building work), or different housing and care protocols [five]. Some examples of ways in which practitioners are using biotelemetry to appraise welfare include (on the ground of an online survey conducted past the writer):

using telemetered information to aid make up one's mind humane endpoints;
reusing implanted animals in welfare studies, e.g., to provide physiological correlates with behaviour;
using telemetered data to assess stress due to restraint and transport;
comparison responses to unlike housing, enrichments and interactions with humans;
monitoring recovery from surgery using telemetered data; and
using physiological information to assistance compare the effectiveness of different analgesic agents.

Opportunities to use telemetered data to reduce the suffering and improve the welfare of the animals on the written report—or other animals—should be identified and taken upwardly wherever possible. For example, discussion between the researcher and the ethics or animal care and use committee at the project planning stage may identify the potential to utilise the data in this way, or this may arise at mid-term or retrospective review of a project [31].

three. Recommendations

Whatever the species of beast, purpose of the study or nature of the biotelemetry organization, the aim should be to provide a good standard of housing and care for animals on biotelemetry studies, equally for any other projection. Although biotelemetry can present some challenges to refining housing and care, many of these can exist overcome by flexible thinking, keeping up to date with developments and existence prepared to resource new equipment and approaches, every bit set out in the recommendations beneath.

Recognise that although biotelemetry can facilitate reduction and refinement, the technique has the potential to cause suffering—it is a 'refinement that needs refining'. In that location is a need to apply a harm-benefit assessment to procedures involving biotelemetry and to ensure that these are fully refined.
Continue up to date with technical developments such as wider availability of multi-frequency devices and smaller implants. If there are unmet technological needs that could aid to refine the employ of biotelemetry (e.chiliad., multi-frequency, implantable devices for mice), communicate with device manufacturers to make them enlightened of the demand.
Ensure that surgical procedures are conducted according to current good exercise with respect to the competence of the surgeon, surgical approach, welfare assessment, pain management, wound closure and asepsis.
Provide group housing for social animals used in biotelemetry studies as the default; ensure that animals are only singly housed if there is sound scientific or veterinary justification.
If periods of unmarried housing are unavoidable during data collection, keep these to a minimum and monitor animals carefully during reintroductions.
Provide environmental enrichment as the default, thinking creatively about alternative approaches if some items would not be appropriate.
Critically consider the pros and cons of automated observation systems that necessitate single housing, taking the welfare and scientific implications into account.
Set a limit for maximum elapsing of laboratory housing for long term studies, with clear criteria for behavioural assessments and humane endpoints. Seek advice on this from the attending veterinarian, experienced beast technologists, and/or local ethics, animate being care and use commission or animate being welfare trunk as appropriate.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to Dusty Karazan and Cindy Fence for a very helpful discussion; also to members of Compmed, the Laboratory Creature Refinement and Enrichment Forum (LAREF) and the LinkedIn Laboratory Animal Science Group for sharing information almost their current practices with me. Thanks also to Maggy Jennings, Sophie Masneuf and Tony Webb for their helpful comments during the drafting of this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of involvement.

References

1. Lexicon and Thesaurus – Merriam-Webster Online. [(accessed on 13 December 2013)]. Available online: http://www.merriam-webster.com/

2. Sarazan R.D., Schweitz K.T.R. Standing on the shoulders of giants: Dean Franklin and his remarkable contributions to physiological measurements in animals. Adv. Physiol. Educ. 2009;33:144–156. doi: ten.1152/advan.90208.2008. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

iii. Grenwis J.E. Contempo advances in telemetry promote farther progress in reduction and refinement. NC3Rs Invited Articles, 2010. [(accessed on 13 December 2013)]. Available online: http://www.nc3rs.org.great britain/news.asp?id=16

5. Morton D.B., Hawkins P., Bevan R., Heath K., Kirkwood J., Pearce P., Scott L., Whelan M., Webb A. Refinements in telemetry procedures: Seventh report of the BVA(AWF)/FRAME/ RSPCA/UFAW Joint Working Group on Refinement, Part A. Lab. Anim. 2003;37:261–299. doi: 10.1258/002367703322389861. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

6. Hawkins P., Morton D.B., Bevan R., Heath K., Kirkwood J., Pearce P., Scott L., Whelan G., Webb A. Husbandry refinements for rats, mice, dogs and non-human being primates used in telemetry procedures: Seventh study of the BVA(AWF)/FRAME/RSPCA/UFAW Joint Working Group on Refinement, Office B. Lab. Anim. 2004;38:1–x. doi: 10.1258/002367704323145733. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

7. European Committee Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the Protection of Animals used for Scientific Purposes. Off. J. Eur. Wedlock. 2010;L 276:33–79. [Google Scholar]

eight. Jennings M., Berdoy M., editors. Laboratory Fauna Science Association (LASA); Tamworth, United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland: 2010. [(accessed on xiii December 2013)]. Guiding Principles for Preparing for Undertaking Aseptic Surgery. A Report by the LASA Education, Training and Ethics Section. Available online: http://www.lasa.co.united kingdom/publications.html [Google Scholar]

nine. van der Staay F.J., Arndt S.Southward., Nordquist R.E. Evaluation of animal models of neurobehavioral disorders. Behav. Brain. Funct. 2009;5 doi: ten.1186/1744-9081-5-eleven. [PMC complimentary commodity] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

10. Kilkenny C., Parsons N., Kadyszewski E., Festing M.F.W., Cuthill I.C., Fry D., Hutton J., Altman D.G. Survey of the quality of experimental design, statistical analysis and reporting of inquiry using animals. PLoS Ane. 2009;4 doi: 10.1371/periodical.pone.0007824. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

11. van der Worp H.B., Howells D.W., Sena E.Due south., Porritt Thousand.J., Rewell S., O'Collins V., Macleod M.R. Can beast models of disease reliably inform human studies? PLoS Med. 2010;7 doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000245. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

12. Editorial Staff of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences . Creature Models: Their Value in Predicting Drug Efficacy and Toxicity. Book 1245 Wiley-Blackwell; Hoboken, NJ, USA: 2011. [Google Scholar]

14. Hawkins P. Facts and demonstrations: Exploring the effects of enrichment on data quality. [(accessed on 18 February 2014)]; The Enrichment Record. 2014 :12–21. Available online: http://enrichmentrecord.com/current-issue/ [Google Scholar]

xv. National Inquiry Council . Guide for the Intendance and Utilise of Laboratory Animals. 8th ed. National Academies Press; Washington, DC, U.s.: 2011. [Google Scholar]

16. Pérez C., Canal J.R., Domínguez E., Campillo J.E., Guillén G., Torres Thousand.D. Individual housing influences certain biochemical parameters in the rat. Lab. Anim. 1997;31:357–361. doi: 10.1258/002367797780596158. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

17. Späni D., Arras M., König B., Rülicke T. Higher centre charge per unit of laboratory mice housed individually vs in pairs. Lab. Anim. 2003;37:54–62. doi: 10.1258/002367703762226692. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

18. Verwer C.M., van der Ven L.T.One thousand., van den Bos R., Hendriksen C.F.One thousand. Furnishings of housing condition on experimental outcome in a reproduction toxicity study. Reg. Tox. Pharmacol. 2007;48:184–193. doi: x.1016/j.yrtph.2007.03.004. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

nineteen. Karelina K., Norman G.J., Zhang N., Morris J.S., Peng H., DeVries A.C. Social isolation alters neuroinflammatory response to stroke. PNAS. 2009;106:5895–5900. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

20. Meijer Thousand.Thousand., Kramer K., Remie R., Spruijt B.M., van Zutphen L.F.K., Baumans V. Effect of routine procedures on physiological parameters in mice kept under different husbandry procedures. Anim. Welf. 2006;15:31–38. [Google Scholar]

21. Meijer M.K., Sommer R., Spruijt B.M., van Zutphen L.F.K. Influence of environmental enrichment and handling on the acute stress response in individually housed mice. Lab. Anim. 2007;41:161–173. doi: ten.1258/002367707780378168. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

22. Laboratory Animal Science Clan (LASA) In: Laboratory Creature Science Association Guidance on the Rehoming of Laboratory Dogs. A Written report Based on a LASA Working Party and LASA Meeting on Rehoming Laboratory Animals. Jennings M., Howard B., editors. LASA; Tamworth, United kingdom: 2004. [(accessed on 13 December 2013)]. Available online: http://www.lasa.co.uk/publications.html [Google Scholar]

23. Hawkins P., Hubrecht R., Buckwell A., Cubitt S., Howard B., Jackson A. Refining Rabbit Intendance: A Resource for Those Working With Rabbits in Enquiry. RSPCA; Southwater, U.k.: 2008. [(accessed on 13 December 2013)]. Available online: http://www.rspca.org.britain/researchrabbits [Google Scholar]

24. Wolfensohn S., Lloyd Grand. Introduction to surgery and surgical techniques. In: Wolfensohn S., Lloyd M., editors. Handbook of Laboratory Animal Management and Welfare. quaternary ed. Wiley-Blackwell; Chichester, UK: 2013. [Google Scholar]

25. Hawkins P., Morton D.B., Burman O., Dennison North., Honess P., Jennings Thou., Lane Southward., Middleton V., Roughan J.V., Wells S., Westwood 1000. A guide to defining and implementing protocols for the welfare assessment of laboratory animals: Eleventh report of the BVA(AWF)/FRAME/RSPCA/UFAW Joint Working Grouping on Refinement. Lab. Anim. 2011;45:1–13. doi: 10.1258/la.2010.010031. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

26. Seaman S.C. Laboratory Rabbit Housing: An Investigation of the Social and Physical Environment. [(accessed on 13 December 2013)]. A Summary of the Study to the UFAW Pharmaceutical Housing and Husbandry Steering Committee (PHHSC), Based on a Ph.D. Thesis, 2002. Available online: http://world wide web.ufaw.org.u.k./pdf/phhsc-schol1-summary.pdf

27. Buchanan-Smith H. Marmosets and tamarins. In: Hubrecht R., Kirkwood J., editors. The UFAW Handbook on the Care and Management of Laboratory and Other Inquiry Animals. eighth ed. Wiley-Blackwell; Chichester, U.k.: 2010. pp. 543–563. [Google Scholar]

28. MacArthur Clark J., Pomeroy C.J. The laboratory dog. In: Hubrecht R., Kirkwood J., editors. The UFAW Handbook on the Care and Direction of Laboratory and Other Inquiry Animals. eighth ed. Wiley-Blackwell; Chichester, United kingdom: 2010. pp. 432–452. [Google Scholar]

29. Van Loo P.50.P., Kuin N., Sommer R., Avsaroglu H., Pham T., Baumans V. Impact of 'living apart together' on postoperative recovery of mice compared with social and individual housing. Lab. Anim. 2007;41:441–455. doi: ten.1258/002367707782314328. [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

30. Masneuf Southward. (University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland). 2011. Personal observations.

31. LASA/RSPCA Guiding Principles on Skilful Practice for Upstanding Review Processes. 2d ed. 2010. [(accessed on xiii December 2013)]. Bachelor online: http://www.lasa.co.britain/publications.html

Articles from Animals : an Open Access Journal from MDPI are provided hither courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Plant (MDPI)

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494373/

Posted by: embreetheatelf.blogspot.com