The Use of Animal Models in Behavioural Neuroscience Research

2014 ◽  
pp. 17-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernice Bovenkerk ◽  
Frederike Kaldewaij
Keyword(s):  
Animal Models ◽  
Neuroscience Research

scholarly journals Methods Used and Application of the Mouse Grimace Scale in Biomedical Research 10 Years On: A Scoping Review

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 673
Author(s):  
Alexandra L. Whittaker ◽  
Yifan Liu ◽  
Timothy H. Barker
Keyword(s):  
Animal Models ◽  
Mouse Models ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Facial Features ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Research Fields ◽  
Neuroscience Research ◽  
Wide Range

The Mouse Grimace Scale (MGS) was developed 10 years ago as a method for assessing pain through the characterisation of changes in five facial features or action units. The strength of the technique is that it is proposed to be a measure of spontaneous or non-evoked pain. The time is opportune to map all of the research into the MGS, with a particular focus on the methods used and the technique’s utility across a range of mouse models. A comprehensive scoping review of the academic literature was performed. A total of 48 articles met our inclusion criteria and were included in this review. The MGS has been employed mainly in the evaluation of acute pain, particularly in the pain and neuroscience research fields. There has, however, been use of the technique in a wide range of fields, and based on limited study it does appear to have utility for pain assessment across a spectrum of animal models. Use of the method allows the detection of pain of a longer duration, up to a month post initial insult. There has been less use of the technique using real-time methods and this is an area in need of further research.

scholarly journals The Contribution of Environmental Complexity to Phenotypic Variation in Mice and Rats

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda C. Kentner ◽  
Amanda V. Speno ◽  
Joanne Doucette ◽  
Ryland C. Roderick
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Animal Models ◽  
Environmental Enrichment ◽  
Phenotypic Traits ◽  
Research Translation ◽  
Environmental Complexity ◽  
Neuroscience Research ◽  
Coefficients Of Variation ◽  
Environmental Stimulation ◽  
And Control

AbstractThe reproducibility and translation of neuroscience research is assumed to be undermined by introducing environmental complexity and heterogeneity. Rearing laboratory animals with minimal (if any) environmental stimulation is thought to control for biological variability but may not adequately test the robustness of our animal models. Standard laboratory housing is associated with reduced demonstrations of species typical behaviors and changes in neurophysiology that may impact the translation of research results. Moreover, modest increases in environmental enrichment (EE) mitigate against insults used to induce animal models of disease, directly calling into question the translatability of our work. This may in part underlie the disconnect between preclinical and clinical research findings. Enhancing environmental stimulation for our model organisms promotes ethological natural behaviors but may simultaneously increase phenotypic trait variability. To test this assumption, we conducted a systematic review and evaluated coefficients of variation between EE and control housed animals. Overall, animals housed in enrichment were not more variable than controls. Therefore, environmental heterogeneity introduced into the laboratory does not compromise data integrity.Highlights-Environmental complexity is thought to increase phenotypic variability, undermining research translation-We conducted a systematic review to compare between environmentally enriched and control housed animals-Coefficients of variation were evaluated across several phenotypic traits-Animals housed in environmental enrichment were not more variable than controls-We also provide a methodological reporting table for environmental enrichment use in neuroscience research

scholarly journals Methods Used and Application of the Mouse Grimace Scale in Biomedical Research 10 Years on: A Systematic Scoping Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra L. Whittaker ◽  
Yifan Liu ◽  
Timothy H. Barker
Keyword(s):  
Animal Models ◽  
Biomedical Research ◽  
Acute Pain ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Pain Assessment ◽  
Facial Features ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Research Fields ◽  
Neuroscience Research ◽  
Wide Range

The Mouse Grimace Scale (MGS) was developed 10 years ago to assess pain through characterisation of changes in five facial features or action units. The strength of the technique is that it is proposed to be a measure of spontaneous or non-evoked pain. A comprehensive scoping review of the academic literature was performed. The MGS has been employed mainly in evaluation of acute pain, particularly in the pain and neuroscience research fields. There has however been use of the technique in a wide range of fields, and based on limited study it does appear to have utility for pain assessment across a spectrum of animal models. Use of the method does allow detection of pain of a longer duration, up to a month post-initial insult. There has been less use of the technique using real-time methods and this is an area in need of further research.

Better lab animal models for translational neuroscience research and CNS drug development

Lab Animal ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 91-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darya A Meshalkina ◽  
Cai Song ◽  
Allan V Kalueff
Keyword(s):  
Animal Models ◽  
Drug Development ◽  
Translational Neuroscience ◽  
Neuroscience Research

scholarly journals Neuroethics and Animals: Report and Recommendations From the University of Pennsylvania Animal Research Neuroethics Workshop

ILAR Journal ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam J Shriver ◽  
Tyler M John
Keyword(s):  
Animal Models ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
The United States ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Early Years ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
Ethical Implications ◽  
Neuroscience Research ◽  
Nonhuman Animals ◽  
The University

Abstract Growing awareness of the ethical implications of neuroscience in the early years of the 21st century led to the emergence of the new academic field of “neuroethics,” which studies the ethical implications of developments in the neurosciences. However, despite the acceleration and evolution of neuroscience research on nonhuman animals, the unique ethical issues connected with neuroscience research involving nonhuman animals remain underdiscussed. This is a significant oversight given the central place of animal models in neuroscience. To respond to these concerns, the Center for Neuroscience and Society and the Center for the Interaction of Animals and Society at the University of Pennsylvania hosted a workshop on the “Neuroethics of Animal Research” in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. At the workshop, expert speakers and attendees discussed ethical issues arising from neuroscience research involving nonhuman animals, including the use of animal models in the study of pain and psychiatric conditions, animal brain-machine interfaces, animal–animal chimeras, cerebral organoids, and the relevance of neuroscience to debates about personhood. This paper highlights important emerging ethical issues based on the discussions at the workshop. This paper includes recommendations for research in the United States from the authors based on the discussions at the workshop, loosely following the format of the 2 Gray Matters reports on neuroethics published by the Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document