Improving quality of science through better animal welfare: The NC3Rs strategy

Lab Animal

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 152-156

  Prescott, Mark J ^a   Lidster, Katie ^a  

^a National Centre for the Replacement   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMAL WELFARE; ECONOMICS; EXPERIMENTAL ANIMAL; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES; STANDARDS; UNITED KINGDOM;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENTATION; ANIMAL HUSBANDRY; ANIMAL WELFARE; ANIMALS; ANIMALS, LABORATORY; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 85016220214     PISSN: 00937355     EISSN: 15484475     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/laban.1217     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Clemence, M. & Leaman, J. Public Attitudes to Animal research in 2016. Ipsos MORI Social Research Institute/Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. Http://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Publications/sri-public-attitudes-to-animal-research-2016.pdf (2016).
2. Home Office. Guidance on the Operation of the Animals (scientifc Procedures) Act 1986. HMSO. Http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/operation-of-aspa (2014).
3. Nc3rs, AMrc, BBsrc, Defra, ePSRC, MRC, NERC & Wellcome trust. Responsibility in the Use of Animab in Bioscience Research: Expectations of the Major Research Councib and Charitable Funding Bodies (Nc3rs, 2015).
4. Fleetwood, G. et al. Making progress and gaining momentum in global 3rs efforts: how the european pharmaceutical industry is contributing. J. Am. Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 54, 192-197 (2015).
5. Russel, W.M.S. & Burch, R.L. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique (Methuen, 1959).
6. Buchanan-smith, H.M. et al. Harmonizing the defnition of refnement. Anim. Welf 14, 379-384 (2005).
7. Lloyd, M.H. et al. Refnement: promoting the three rs in practice. Lab. Anim. 42, 284-293 (2008).
8. Poole, T. Happy animals make good science. Lab. Anim. 31, 116-124 (1997).
9. Mendl, M. & Paul, E.S. Consciousness, emotion and animal welfare: insights from cognitive science. Anim. Welf. 13, s17-s25 (2004).
10. Mendl, M. et al. Cognitive bias as an indicator of animal emotion and welfare: emerging evidence and underlying mechanism. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 118, 161-181 (2009).
11. Hall, L.E. et al. Refning dosing by oral gavage in the dog: a protocol to harmonise welfare. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 72, 35-46 (2015).
12. Bethell, E. et al. Emotion evaluation and response slowing in a non-human primate: new directions for cognitive bias measures of animal emotion? Behav. Sci. 6, 2 (2016).
13. Ash, H. & Buchanan-smith, H.M. The long-term impact of infant rearing background on the affective state of adult common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 174, 128-136 (2016).
14. Gray, H. et al. Physiological, behavioral, and scientifc impact of different fuid control protocols in the rhesus macaque (Macaca mulatta). Eneuro 3 (4), 1-15 (2016).
15. Scullion Hall, L.E.M. et al. The infuence of facility and home pen design on the welfare of the laboratory-housed dog. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 83, 21-29 (2017).
16. Holmes, A.M. et al. Impact of tank background on the welfare of the African clawed frog, Xenopus laevis (Daudin). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 185, 131-136 (2016).
17. Hurst, J.L. & West, R.S. Taming anxiety in laboratory mice. Nat. Methods 7, 825-826 (2010).
18. Gouveia, K. & Hurst, J.L. Reducing mouse anxiety during handling: effect of experience with handling tunnels. PLoS ONE 8, e66401 (2013).
19. Tasker, L. Linking welfare and quality of scientifc output in cynomolgus macaques (Macaca fasicularis) used for regulatory toxicology. PhD thesis, University of stirling. Http://dspace.stir.ac.uk/bitstream/1893/9801/1/Loutaskerthesis2012.pdf (2012).
20. Tymvios, C. et al. Real-time measurement of non-lethal platelet thromboembolic responses in the anaesthetized mouse. Thromb. Haemost 99, 435-440 (2008).
21. Moore, C. & Emerson, M. Assessment of platelet aggregation responses in vivo in the mouse. Methods Mol. Biol. 788, 21-28 (2012).
22. Slater, H. et al. Individually customizable non-invasive head immobilization system for non-human primates with an option for voluntary engagement. J. Neurosci. Methods 269, 46-60 (2016).
23. Bains, R.S. et al. Analysis of individual mouse activity in group housed animals of different inbred strains using a novel automated home cage analysis system. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 10, 106 (2016).
24. Lidster, K. et al. Opportunities for improving animal welfare in rodent models of epilepsy and seizures. J. Neurosci. Methods 260, 2-25 (2016).
25. Prescott, M.J. et al. Refnement of the use of food and fuid control as motivational tools for macaques used in behavioral neuroscience research: report of a working group of the Nc3rs. J. Neurosci. Methods 193, 167-188 (2010).
26. Prior, H. et al. Social housing of non-rodents during cardiovascular recordings in safety pharmacology and toxicology studies. J. Pharmacol. Toxicol. Methods 81, 75-87 (2016).
27. Chapman, K. et al. A global pharmaceutical company initiative: an evidence-based approach to defne the upper limit of body weight loss in short term toxicity studies. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 67, 27-38 (2013).
28. Simonato, M. et al. The challenge and promise of anti-epileptic therapy development in animal models. Lancet Neurol. 13, 949-960 (2014).
29. Hawkins, P. et al. A good death? report of the second Newcastle meeting on laboratory animal euthansia. Animals 6 (9), 50 (2016).
30. Gaskill, B.N. et al. Heat or insulation: behavioral titration of mouse preference for warmth or access to a nest. PLoS ONE 7, e32799 (2012).
31. Adams, D.L. et al. A watertight acrylic-free titanium recording chamber for electrophysiology in behaving monkeys. J. Neurophysiol. 106, 1581-1590 (2011).
32. National competent Authorities for the implementation of Directive 2010/63/eU on the Protection of Animals Used For scientifc Purposes. A working document on the development of a common education and training framework to fulfl the requirements under the Directive: replacing consensus document of 18-19 september 2013, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab-animals/pdf/endorsed-e-t.pdf (2014).
33. Carbone, L. Pain in laboratory animals: the ethical and regulatory imperatives. PLoS ONE 6, e21578 (2011).
34. Langford, D.J. et al. Coding of facial expressions of pain in the laboratory mouse. Nat Methods 7, 447-449 (2010).
35. Sotocinal, S.G. et al. The rat Grimace scale: a partially automated method for quantifying pain in the laboratory rat via facial expressions. Mol. Pain 7, 55. 10.1186/1744-8069-7-55 (2011).
36. Leach, M.C. et al. The assessment of post-vasectomy pain in mice using behavior and the Mouse Grimace scale. PLoS ONE 7, e35656 (2012).
37. Keating, s.C.J. et al. Evaluation of eMLA cream for preventing pain during tattooing of rabbits: changes in physiological, behavioral and facial expression responses. PLoS ONE 7, e44437 (2012).
38. Miller, A.L. et al. The infuence of isofurane anaesthesia on the rat Grimace scale. PLoS ONE 11, e0166652 (2016).
39. Leung, V. et al. Real-time application of the rat Grimace scale as a welfare refnement in laboratory rats. Sci. Rep. 6, 31667 (2016).