scholarly journals Ensuring due process in the IACUC and animal welfare setting: considerations in developing noncompliance policies and procedures for institutional animal care and use committees and institutional officials

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (10) ◽  
pp. 4216-4225 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara C. Hansen ◽  
Sylvia Gografe ◽  
Stacy Pritt ◽  
Kai‐lin Catherine Jen ◽  
Camille A. McWhirter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Due Process ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Animal Care

scholarly journals 344 The Ag Guide serves as a primary standard for animal scientists and AAALAC accreditation of Ag research programs

2020 ◽  
Vol 98 (Supplement_4) ◽  
pp. 71-72
Author(s):  
Janeen Salak-Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Primary Standard ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Professional Judgment ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Accreditation Program ◽  
Agricultural Animal ◽  
Animal Care

Abstract Institutions that engage in animal research and production must ensure that high standards of animal care and use meet expectations of society while being ethical stewards of the animals they use in research. In order to achieve engagement in best practices, the Ag Guide is the most appropriate standard for assessing agricultural animals used in research and teaching. The Ag Guide minimizes the potential to overuse performance standards while enhancing the ability to appropriately address specific performance-derived exceptions to situations for which they have been validated. The primary objectives of the standards established in the Ag Guide are well-aligned with the goals of the AAALAC International accreditation program. The Ag Guide provides scientifically-sound, performance-based approaches to animal care and housing, which meet the expectations of AAALAC’s accreditation program. AAALAC provides a third-party peer review of all facets of the animal care and use program that serves as an effective mechanism to ensure institutions meet the standards of the Ag Guide. The process is designed to help identify the strengths and weaknesses of the program to ensure high-quality scientific outcomes and a high level of animal welfare. AAALAC accreditation program for agricultural animal research program is built on the cornerstone of the Ag Guide standards and connects science and responsible animal care. AAALAC accreditation promotes a comprehensive, institutionally supported program with a commitment to continuous improvement, humane and ethical animal care resulting in high-quality animal welfare, and scientific validity. AAALAC takes the position that, in accredited programs, the housing and care for agricultural animals should meet the standards that prevail on a high-quality, well-managed farm and the Ag Guide serves as this foundation. Therefore, the use of the Ag Guide for agricultural animal programs ensures a review that is based on science, professional judgment, and the best interests of the animal.

Responsible Science and Research Animal Use

ILAR Journal ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Patricia V Turner ◽  
R Wayne Barbee
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Animal Science ◽  
Scientific Excellence ◽  
Experimental Planning ◽  
Animal Use ◽  
Animal Care ◽  
Science And Research ◽  
Ethical Oversight ◽  
Animal Handlers

Abstract This issue of the ILAR Journal focuses on the topic of responsible science as it relates to animal research. We start with the concept of the scientist as a responsible citizen and then move through multiple phases of research including careful experimental planning, reporting, and incorporation of laboratory animal science. The work of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) or animal ethical/oversight body in reviewing both animal use and contributing to scientific excellence is explored. Additional topics include protection of animal handlers from multiple experimental hazards, use of agricultural animals and wildlife studies, regulatory ambiguities, and harmonization of animal research. Rounding out the issue is a discussion of how animal care and use programs can enhance animal welfare while mitigating regulatory burden, and our responsibility to clearly communicate the ethical use of animals in advancing biomedical research. A deeper understanding of these topics can assist scientists in simultaneously advancing their research and animal welfare.

Animal Research Pathology: Regulatory and Safety Considerations

ILAR Journal ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-118
Author(s):  
J M Wallace ◽  
R L Trundy
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Species ◽  
Hazardous Materials ◽  
Principal Investigator ◽  
Animal Research ◽  
Laboratory Personnel ◽  
Safety Requirements ◽  
Safety Considerations ◽  
Animal Care

Abstract Animal research pathology encompasses a wide array of procedures and may involve work with a variety of animal species and hazards. To protect laboratory personnel and ensure data integrity, pathologists must be familiar with the activities performed in their laboratories and the applicable regulatory and safety requirements. Failure to address issues proactively may result in exposure of personnel to hazardous materials and/or collection of data in a manner that does not conform to animal welfare or quality control standards. This manuscript provides a brief introduction to important animal research pathology regulatory and safety considerations. The importance of close communication between the principal investigator, pathologist, laboratory personnel, Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee, and institutional safety office/experts is emphasized and a mechanism for improving communication is discussed.

Why Do Monkeys Watch TV?

Animal Ethos ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 76-104
Author(s):  
Lesley A. Sharp
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Research Personnel ◽  
Animal Care ◽  
Research Tools

A curious—albeit longstanding—lab practice involves the paired use of television and video screens as both research tools and forms of animal welfare (otherwise known as “enrichment”) in work conducted with non-human primates (NHPs). This chapter interrogates the history and logic of the use of television in primate labs. NHPs, by virtue of their evolutionary and cognitive proximity to humans, stand out as exceptional creatures whose use in research generates a host of moral quandaries. For instance, primates have long served as barometers within debates over animal welfare (both within labs among research personnel and outside among activists). Macaques, who have been a primate of choice for lab research, figure especially prominently throughout this chapter as offering an important example of television’s use. By tracking how, and the logic of why, monkeys watch television enables one to uncover and decipher a specialized moral logic of animal care, one that defines the worth of the monkey and the human in the lab.

A REDCap application that links researchers, animal facility staff and members of the IACUC in animal health monitoring

2018 ◽  
Vol 53 (5) ◽  
pp. 500-507
Author(s):  
Cristobal Carvajal ◽  
Catalina Vallejos ◽  
Dominique Lemaitre ◽  
Jorge Ruiz ◽  
Camila Guzmán ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Health ◽  
Preclinical Study ◽  
Data Management System ◽  
Non Profit ◽  
Reading Errors ◽  
Behavioral Parameters ◽  
Key Indicators ◽  
Animal Care ◽  
Facility Staff

Research studies involving animal experimentation are regulated by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC). To this end, the IACUC must integrate the information provided by the investigators of each preclinical study and the veterinarians from the animal facility in order to monitor and approve the process. Using a paper-based system to collect animal health and welfare data is a common, albeit time-consuming practice, prone to transcription and reading errors, not to mention inconvenient for veterinarians and investigators wishing to make timely and collaborative decisions when animal welfare is at risk. We created a web-based monitoring system focused on animal health with the potential to improve animal welfare. The data management system is based on REDCap software, which enables data integration in order to offer a solution for animal welfare assessment. The proposed scheme includes key indicators of general health status, such as environment, physical/nutritional information, and behavioral parameters during animal breeding and experimentation, as important components of animal welfare. In addition, the system facilitates communication of this information among researchers, animal facility staff, and the IACUC. REDCap is available to non-profit organizations, and may be adapted and replicated by institutions interested in and responsible for animal care, and used in research. REDCap is an excellent tool for promoting good practices that benefit experimental animal health.

The Animal Welfare Act's Impact on the Scientist

1988 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 447-451
Author(s):  
James W. Glosser ◽  
Phyllis B. York
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Information Service ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Department ◽  
Department Of Agriculture ◽  
States Department ◽  
Long Time ◽  
Animal Care

The bond between animals and humans has existed for a long time. Humans are entrusted with the stewardship for animal care and well-being as a part of their use. Legislation has addressed humane care of animals in the United States since 1873. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is responsible for administering many of these laws, including the Animal Welfare Act. Recent amendments to the Animal Welfare Act require regulations to be established for the exercise of dogs and the psychological well-being of primates. It also requires the establishment of an Institutional Animal Committee, training for scientists, consideration of alternatives by the principal investigator, and the establishment of an information service at the National Agricultural Library.

scholarly journals Behavioral Diversity as a Potential Indicator of Positive Animal Welfare

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 1211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lance J. Miller ◽  
Greg A. Vicino ◽  
Jessica Sheftel ◽  
Lisa K. Lauderdale
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Review Article ◽  
Stereotypic Behavior ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Behavioral Diversity ◽  
Fecal Glucocorticoid Metabolites ◽  
Potential Indicator ◽  
Animal Care ◽  
Positive Animal

Modern day zoos and aquariums continuously assess the welfare of their animals and use evidence to make informed management decisions. Historically, many of the indicators of animal welfare used to assess the collection are negative indicators of welfare, such as stereotypic behavior. However, a lack of negative indicators of animal welfare does not demonstrate that an individual animal is thriving. There is a need for validated measures of positive animal welfare and there is a growing body of evidence that supports the use of behavioral diversity as a positive indicator of welfare. This includes an inverse relationship with stereotypic behavior as well as fecal glucocorticoid metabolites and is typically higher in situations thought to promote positive welfare. This review article highlights previous research on behavioral diversity as a potential positive indicator of welfare. Details are provided on how to calculate behavioral diversity and how to use it when evaluating animal welfare. Finally, the review will indicate how behavioral diversity can be used to inform an evidence-based management approach to animal care and welfare.

Death by Decapitation: A Case Study of the Scientific Definition of Animal Welfare

1997 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 239-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lawrence G. Carbone
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Historical Case Study ◽  
Historical Case ◽  
Laboratory Rodents ◽  
The Social ◽  
Animal Welfare Science ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Animal Care

AbstractAssessments of animal experience and consciousness are embedded in all issues of animal welfare policy, and the field of animal welfare science has been developed to make these evaluations. In light of modern studies of the social construction of scientific knowledge, it is surprising how little attention has been paid to date on how crucial evaluations about animals are made. In this paper, I begin to fill that gap by presenting a historical case study of the attempt to define the pain and distress of one common practice in animal research-the use of the tabletop guillotine to decapitate laboratory rodents. I describe the negotiations involved in reaching consensus on the meaning of the available data and caution animal care and use committees that they should always work with the realization that our scientific knowledge of what animals experience is partial and provisional knowledge at best.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document