Keeping invertebrate research ethical in a landscape of shifting public opinion

Abstract

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.

The neglected impact of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods

“…Forty percent of papers reporting on the use of tracking devices on terrestrial arthropods provided minimal justification for the chosen method or altogether ignored possible side effects. As side effects of tags raise ethical concerns (Drinkwater, Robinson, & Hart, ) and may induce—possibly strong—bias in the generated movement data, they should be quantified and mitigated. The weight, size, drag and balance of the tag as well as the glue used to attach it may affect the performance of the tagged animals (e.g.…”

“…As any novel technology, new tracking devices need to be critically evaluated before being applied in empirical research. For vertebrates, protocols regarding ethical research methodologies are well adopted and monitored by ethics committees (Drinkwater et al, 2019;Kays et al, 2015). Guidelines for the use and impact assessment of tracking devices for vertebrates are actively being developed and refined (Barron et al, 2010;Geen et al, 2019;McIntyre, 2015;Portugal & White, 2018).…”

A validated workflow for rapid taxonomic assignment and monitoring of a national fauna of bees (Apiformes) using high throughput DNA barcoding

“…This study used specimens of bees obtained through mass-collection with pan traps, which was successful in providing a wide range of species for the generation of a reference database and for testing. It should be mentioned that in the wider context of pollinator declines (Powney et al 2019), and invertebrate declines in general (Hallmann et al 2017), careful consideration of the use of broad-target collection methods with high collateral catches should be made (Drinkwater, Robinson and Hart, 2019), although Gezon et al (2015) show that in the case of pan traps in particular, reasonable sampling does not affect long term community structure. Our study protocol used a relatively short pan trap exposure period designed to sample sufficient individuals for long-term monitoring whilst minimising catch sizes (Carvell et al 2016).…”

The welfare and ethics of research involving wild animals: A primer

“…Mortality is not always necessary for sampling and many techniques exist that minimize mortality and allow safe release of captured insects—methods are often designed for convenience of sampling, rather than a specific purpose. Drinkwater, Robinson, and Hart (2019) provide important insights into the shifting public opinion and laws to protect invertebrate welfare during scientific studies. Their recommendations very much align with the principles of the 3Rs as follows: to use appropriate power analyses; reduce by‐catch by refining trapping methods and retain by‐catch for further studies; and minimize suffering (Drinkwater et al, 2019).…”