Animal Welfare From Mouse to Moose—implementing the Principles of the 3rs in Wildlife Research

Lindsjö, Johan; Fahlman, Åsa; Törnqvist, Elin

doi:10.7589/52.2s.s65

Cited by 53 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…From an animal welfare, hunting and research ethics perspective, it is critical to thoroughly assess how the capture process affects the animal. Refinement of wildlife capture methods is essential to minimise stress and improve wild animal welfare, which is in accordance with the principles of the 3Rs—Replacement, Reduction and Refinement [ 4 , 5 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wild boar behaviour during live-trap capture in a corral-style trap: implications for animal welfare

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Wildlife traps are used in many countries without evaluation of their effect on animal welfare. Trap-capture of wild animals should minimise negative effects on animal welfare, irrespective of whether the animals are trapped for hunting, research, or management purposes. Live-trap capture of wild boar (Sus scrofa) followed by killing inside the trap by gunshot is a recently introduced but disputed hunting method in Sweden. Approval of trap constructions is based on gross necropsy findings of 20 trapped and shot wild boars. For improved animal welfare evaluation, our aim was to study wild boar behaviour during live-trapping in a 16 m2 square corral-style trap. Behavioural assessments were conducted after filming 12 capture events of in total 38 wild boars (five adults, 20 subadults, 13 piglets). Selected behavioural traits were compared with pathological changes (trap-related lesions) found at necropsy of the 20 subadults, to determine if these variables were useful proxies of capture-induced stress in wild boar. Results The wild boars spent less time resting in the evening than in the night and morning. Using Friedman’s ANOVA, there was an overall difference in the time spent foraging. However, we only found a difference between the evening and morning in the Wilcoxon matched pairs test after the Sequential Bonferroni correction, where the wild boars spent more time foraging in the evening than in the morning. Single captured individuals showed more escape behaviours and reacted more strongly to external stimuli than individuals captured in a group. It was more common for animals to charge against the mesh walls of the trap upon human approach compared to upon initial capture when the trap door closed. Trap-related pathological findings due to trauma were documented in 13 of the 20 subadults that were necropsied. Behavioural alterations indicative of capture-induced stress (e.g. charging into the trap walls) were documented in trapped wild boars with no or minor physical injuries (e.g. skin abrasions, subcutaneous haemorrhage). Conclusions Behavioural assessment provided valuable information for determination of capture-induced stress in wild boar when evaluating live-trapping in a corral-style trap, whereas pathological evaluation through necropsy did not fully reflect the animal welfare aspects of live-trapping. We emphasize the inclusion of species-specific behavioural data assessment for evaluation of capture-related stress during live-trapping and for testing of new trap constructions before approval.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wild boar behaviour during live-trap capture in a corral-style trap: implications for animal welfare

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Triggered traps were rebaited and reset. Handling rodents and examining them for ticks in the field can be stressful and can cause harm or injury to the animals [40], and it is difficult to accurately determine tick burden on live small mammals [41]. Therefore, we opted for a postmortem full body examination, and voles captured in live traps were euthanized and collected.…”

Section: Host Trappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do bank voles (Myodes glareolus) trapped in live and lethal traps show differences in tick burden?

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In studies assessing tick abundance, the use of live traps to capture and euthanize rodent hosts is a commonly used method to determine their burden. However, captive animals can experience debilitating or fatal capture stress as a result prior to collection. An alternative method is the use of lethal traps, but this can potentially lead to tick drop-off between the time of capture and collection. In this study, in order to determine whether subjecting animals to capture stress is inevitable, we tested the difference in sheep tick (Ixodes ricinus) larval burdens between bank voles (Myodes glareolus) captured alive and euthanized, and lethally trapped bank voles. During 2017 and 2018, 1318 bank voles were captured using live (Ugglan Special no. 2) and lethal (Rapp2 Mousetrap) traps during two consecutive years over three seasons in two locations in Norway. Voles captured alive would remain captive until euthanized, while lethally trapped voles were killed instantly upon capture. Loglinear models, accounting for overdispersion, were used to determine whether trap type was influencing observed tick burden. Bank voles captured in lethal traps carried 5.7% more larvae compared to euthanized voles captured in live traps, but this difference was not significant (p = 0.420). Males were overall captured 2.7 times more frequently than females, and the sex ratio was equal in both trap types. This study shows that the use of lethal traps to determine tick burden of rodents is sufficiently reliable, without having to subject animals to potentially lethal stress, hereby reducing some ethical concerns of animal suffering and the results thereof, without compromising accuracy. Lethal trapping is also often more economical and practical, further favoring this collection method.

show abstract

“…As well as an increased appreciation for the importance of controlling pain in animals in research, there have been shifts in scientific protocol with the development of the three R's principles (reduction, refinement and replacement), as set out in the book ‘The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique’ (Russell & Burch, ). Despite the initially slow reception of the book (Balls, ), these principles are now key to modern research practices, having been adopted and promoted across the international research community (Farnaud, ; Lindsjö, Fahlman, & Törnqvist, ). Examples of bodies which now oversee the implementation the three Rs, as well as other aspects of animal welfare, include the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching (established in 1987) (University of Adelaide, ), the Canadian Council on Animal Care (established 1968) (CCAC, ), and the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research in the UK (established 2004) (N3Rs, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As well as an increased appreciation for the importance of controlling pain in animals in research, there have been shifts in scientific protocol with the development of the three R's principles (reduction, refinement and replacement), as set out in the book 'The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique' (Russell & Burch, 1959). Despite the initially slow reception of the book (Balls, 2009), these principles are now key to modern research practices, having been adopted and promoted across the international research community (Farnaud, 2009;Lindsjö, Fahlman, & Törnqvist, 2016). Examples of bodies which now oversee the implementation the three Rs, Historical shifts in ethical stances towards vertebrate experimentation highlight how rapidly ethical norms have moved to stay in line with scientific understanding of animal suffering.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Keeping invertebrate research ethical in a landscape of shifting public opinion

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invertebrate study systems are cornerstones of biological and biomedical research, providing key insights into fields from genetics to behavioural ecology. Despite the widespread use of invertebrates in research, there are very few ethical guidelines surrounding their use. Focussing on two ethical considerations faced during invertebrate studies—collecting methods and euthanasia—we make recommendations for integrating principles of vertebrate research into invertebrate research practice. We argue, given emerging research on invertebrate cognition and shifting public perception on the use of invertebrates in research, it is vital that the scientific community revisits the ethics of invertebrate use in research. Without careful consideration and development of the ethics surrounding the use of invertebrates by the scientific community, there is a danger of losing public support. It is imperative that the public understand the significance of research that uses invertebrates and that scientists demonstrate their ethical treatment of their experimental subjects.

show abstract

Animal Welfare From Mouse to Moose—implementing the Principles of the 3rs in Wildlife Research

Cited by 53 publications

References 69 publications

Wild boar behaviour during live-trap capture in a corral-style trap: implications for animal welfare

Wild boar behaviour during live-trap capture in a corral-style trap: implications for animal welfare

Do bank voles (Myodes glareolus) trapped in live and lethal traps show differences in tick burden?

Keeping invertebrate research ethical in a landscape of shifting public opinion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About