Genetic engineering and other factors that might affect human-animal interactions in the research setting

Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 267-277

  Comber, Julie ^a   Griffin, Gilly ^a  

^a Canadian Council on Animal Care   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGRICULTURE; ANIMAL BEHAVIOR; ANIMAL CARE; ANIMAL GENETICS; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMAL USE; ANIMAL WELLBEING; CAREGIVER; CLONING; GENETIC ENGINEERING; HUMAN; JOB SATISFACTION; NONHUMAN; PUBLIC OPINION; REVIEW; SOCIAL INTERACTION; SPECIES DIFFERENCE;

ANIMALIA; MUS;

EID: 34547532707     PISSN: 10888705     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10888700701354046     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Arluke, A. (1999). Uneasiness among laboratory technicians. Occupational Medicine, 14, 305-316.
2. Barnett, J. L. (1992). Fear of humans and its relationships with productivity in laying hens at commercial farms. British Poultry Science, 33, 699-710.
3. Bayne, K. (2002). Development of the human-research animal bond and its impact on animal well-being. ILAR Journal, 43, 4-9.
4. Berdoy, M. (Producer). (2002). The laboratory rat: A natural history [Film]. (Available at http://www.ratlife.org)
5. Birke, L. (2004). Who - or what - is the laboratory rat (and mouse)? Society & Animals, 11, 207-224.
6. Breuer, K., Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., Matthews, L. R., & Coleman, G. J. (2000). Behavioural response to humans and the productivity of commercial dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 66, 273-288.
7. Canadian Council on Animal Care. (n.d.). CCAC system of oversight. Retrieved February 14, 2006 from http://www.ccac.ca/en/About_CCAC/ About_CCAC_Intro.htm
8. Canadian Council on Animal Care. (1989). CCAC policy statement on ethics of animal investigation. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Author.
9. Canadian Council on Animal Care. (1997). CCAC guidelines on transgenic animals. Retrieved February 11, 2006, from http://www.ccac.ca/english/gui_pol/GUFRAME.HTM
10. Chance, M. R. A. (1956). Environmental factors influencing gonadotrophin assay in the rat. Nature, 177, 228, 229.
11. Chance, M. R. A. (1957). The contribution of environment to uniformity. Laboratory Animals Bureau Collected Papers, 6, 59-73.
12. Chance, M. R. A., & Russell, W. M. S. (1997). The benefits of giving experimental animals the best possible environment. In V. Reinhardt & A. Reinhardt (Eds.), Comfortable quarters for laboratory animal (pp. 12-14). Washington, DC: Animal Welfare Institute.
13. Chang, F. T., & Hart, L.H. (2002). Human-animal bonds in the laboratory: How animal behavior affects the perspectives of caregivers. ILAR Journal, 43, 10-18.
14. Coleman, G. J. (2000). Modifying stockperson attitudes and behavior toward pigs at a large commercial farm. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 66, 11-20.
15. Coleman, G. J., Hemsworth, P. H., & Hay, M. (1998). Predicting stockperson behavior toward pigs from attitudinal and job-related variables and empathy. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 58, 63-75.
16. Cransberg, P. H., Hemsworth, P. H., & Coleman, G. J. (2000). Human factors affecting the behaviour and productivity of commercial broiler chickens. British Poultry Science, 41, 272-279.
17. Davis, H. (1996). How human/animal bonding affects the animals, In L. Krulisch, S. Mayer, & R. C. Simmonds (Eds.), The human/research animal relationship (pp. 67-75). Greenbelt, MD: Scientist's Center for Animal Welfare.
18. Davis, H., & Balfour, D. (1992). The inevitable bond. In H. Davis & D. Balfour (Eds.), The inevitable bond: Examining scientist-animal interactions (pp. 1-5). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Einsiedel, E. F., & Smith, J. A. (2005). Canadian views on patenting biotechnology (Report prepared for the Canadian Biotechnology Advisory Committee). Retrieved May 24, 2006, from http://cbac-cccb.ca/epic/internet/incbac-cccb.nsf/en/h_ah00128e.html
20. Federation of European Laboratory Animal Science Associations. (n.d.). FELASA recommendations. Retrieved February 12, 2006, from http://www.felasa.org/recommendations.htm
21. Festing, M. F., & Altman, D. G. (2002). Guidelines for the design and statistical analysis of experiments using laboratory animals. ILAR Journal, 43, 244-258.
22. Fraser, D., & Weary, D. M. (2004). Quality of life for farm animals: Linking science, ethics, and animal welfare. In G. J. Benson & B. E. Rollin (Eds.), The well-being of farm animals: Challenges and solutions (pp. 39-60). Ames, IA: Blackwell.
23. Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., & Coleman, G. J. (1993). Improving productivity with better stock handling. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production, 53, 211-314.
24. Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., Coleman, G. J., & Hansen, C. (1989). A study of the relationships between the attitudinal and behavioural profiles of stockpersons and the level of fear of humans and reproductive performance of commercial pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 23, 301-314.
25. Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., & Hansen, C. (1981). The influence of handling by humans on the behavior, growth, and corticosteroids in the juvenile female pig. Hormones and Behavior, 15, 396-403.
26. Hemswort, P. H., Coleman, G. J., & Barnett, J. L. (1994). Improving the attitude and behaviour of stockpersons toward pigs and the consequences on the behaviour and reproductive performance of commercial pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 39, 349-362.
27. Hemsworth, P. H., Coleman, G. J., Barnett, J. L., Borg, S., & Dowling, S. (2002). The effects of cognitive behavioral intervention on the attitude and behavior of stockpersons and the behavior and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science, 80, 68-78.
28. Hemsworth, P. H., Coleman, G. J., Barnett, J. L., & Jones, R. B. (1994). Behavioural responses to humans and the productivity of commercial broiler chickens. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 41, 101-114.
29. Hockly, E., Cordery, P. M., Woodman, B., Mahal, A., van Dellen, A., Blakemore, C., et al. (2002). Environmental enrichment slows disease progression in R6/2 Huntington's disease mice. Annals of Neurology, 51, 235-242.
30. Kuhnen, G. (1999). The effect of cage size and enrichment on core temperature and febrile response of the golden hamster. Lab Animal, 33, 221-227.
31. National Center for the Replacement, Refinement, and Reduction of Animals in Research. (2006). Report of GA mice working group. Retrieved April 5, 2006, from http://www.nc3rs.org.uk/page.asp?id=231.
32. Nerem, R. M., Levesque, M. J., & Cornhill, J. F. (1980). Social environment as a factor in diet-induced atherosclerosis. Science, 208, 1475-1476.
33. Russell, W. M. S., & Burch, R. L. (1959). The principles of humane experimental technique. Potters Bar, Herts, UK: Universities Federation for Animal Welfare.
34. Sherwin, C. M. (2004). The influences of standard laboratory cages on rodents and the validity of research data. Animal Welfare, 13, S9-S15.
35. Wolfle, T. L. (Ed.). (2002). Implications of human-animal interactions and bonds in the laboratory [Special issue]. ILAR Journal, 43(1).