Phenotyping of genetically engineered mice: Humane, ethical, environmental, and husbandry issues

ILAR Journal

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 118-123

  Brown, Marilyn J ^a   Murray, Kathleen A ^a  

^a CHARLES RIVER LABORATORIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Animal welfare; Ethics; Genetically engineered mice; IACUC; Phenotype

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL CARE; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DOCUMENTATION; ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR; EXPERIMENTAL ANIMAL WELFARE; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENETIC MODEL; GENETIC SCREENING; GENOTYPE ENVIRONMENT INTERACTION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PHENOTYPE; RESEARCH ETHICS; REVIEW;

ANIMALIA;

EID: 33645059720     PISSN: 10842020     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ilar.47.2.118     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Balls M. 1999. Does the use of transgenic animals raise particular welfare and ethical concerns? ATLA 27:811-813.
2. Buehr M, Hjorth JP, Hansen AK, Sandoe P. 2003. Genetically modified laboratory animals - What welfare problems do they face? J Appl Anim Welf Sci 6:319-338.
3. Crawley JN. 1999. Behavioral phenotyping of transgenic and knockout mice: Experimental design and evaluation of general health, sensory functions, motor abilities, and specific behavioral tests. Brain Res 835: 18-26.
4. Crawley JN. 2000. What's Wrong With My Mouse? New York: Wiley-Liss.
5. Dennis MB Jr. 2000. Humane endpoints for genetically engineered animal models. ILAR J 41:94-98.
6. Dennis MB Jr. 2002. Welfare issues of genetically modified animals. ILAR J 43:100-109.
7. Glenn LM. 2003. When pigs fly? Legal and ethical issues in transgenics and the creation of chimeras. The Walter C. Randall Biomedical Ethics Lecture. Physiologist 46:251.
8. Jegstrup I, Thon R, Hansen AK, Hoitinga MR. 2003. Characterization of transgenic mice - A comparison of protocols for welfare evaluation and phenotype characterization of mice with a suggestion on a future certificate of instruction. Lab Anim 37:1-9.
9. Linder C. 2001. The influence of genetic background on spontaneous and genetically engineered mouse models of complex diseases. Lab Anim 30:34-39.
10. Lipman NS, Perkins SE. 2002. Factors that may influence animal research. In: Fox JG, Anderson LC, Loew FM, Quimby FW, eds. Laboratory Animal Medicine. San Diego: Academic Press. p 1143-1165.
11. Loew FM. 1994. Beyond transgenies: Ethics and values. Br Vet J 150:3-5.
12. Mertens C. 2000. Phenotype characterization and welfare assessment of transgenic rodents (mice). J Appl Anim Welf Sci 3:127-139.
13. Mertens C, Rulicke T. 2000. A comprehensive form for the standardized characterization of transgenic rodents: Genotype, phenotype, welfare assessment, recommendations for refinement [in German]. Altex 17: 15-21.
14. Mertens C, Rulicke T. 1999. Score sheets for the monitoring of transgenic mice. Anim Welf 8:433-438.
15. Moore CJ, Mepham TB. 1995. Transgenesis and animal welfare. ATLA Alt Lab Anim 23:380-397.
16. Murray K, Parker NJ. 2005. Breeding genetically modified rodents: Tips for tracking and troubleshooting reproductive performance. Lab Anim 34:36-41.
17. Nagy A, Gertsenstein M, Vintersten K, Behringer R. 2003. Manipulating the Mouse Embryo: A Laboraotry Manual. Cold Spring Harbor NY: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.
18. Plagge A, Kelsey G, Allen N. 2000. Directed mutagenesis in embryonic stem cells. In: Jackson IJ, Abbott CM, eds. Mouse Genetics and Transgenics: A Practical Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p 247-254.
19. Polites HG, Pinkert CA. 2002. Transgenic animal production focusing on the mouse model. In: Pinkert CA, ed. Transgenic Animal Technology: A Laboratory Handbook. San Diego: Academic Press. p 15-65.
20. Russell WMS, Burch RL. 1959. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd. [Reissued: 1992, Universities Federation for animal Welfare, Herts, England.] .
21. van der Meer M, Rolls A, Baumans V, Olivier B, van Zutphen LF. 2001. Use of score sheets for welfare assessment of transgenic mice. Lab Anim 35:379-389.