Comparison of Alfaxalone and Tricaine Methanesulfonate Immersion Anesthesia And Alfaxalone Residue Clearance In Rainbow Trout (Oncorhynchus Mykiss).

Alfaxalone, a synthetic neuroactive steroid, has been tested as an immersion anesthetic in ornamental fish, but its safety and efficacy in sport fish have not been investigated. In the current study, we compared the physiologic and behavioral effects of alfaxalone with those of tricaine methanesulfonate (MS222) for anesthesia of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) via water immersion. We also analyzed alfaxalone-exposed tissues to determine residue clearance times. Fish were anesthetized for 10 min by immersion in low-dose alfaxalone (Alow; 5 mg/L induction, 1 mg/L maintenance), high-dose alfaxalone (Ahigh; 5 mg/L induction, 2 mg/L maintenance), or MS222 (MS; 150 mg/L induction, 100 mg/L maintenance). Fish received all 3 treatments, separated by a washout period of at least 18 d in a blinded, complete crossover design. We hypothesized that immersion in Alow or Ahigh would provide a stable plane of anesthesia in rainbow trout, with dose-dependent time to recovery, and that opercular rates and depths of anesthesia would be equivalent to that of MS222. The time to anesthesia induction was longer for alfaxalone than MS222 but averaged less than 100 s. The time to recovery from anesthesia was also longer for alfaxalone than MS222, with significantly shorter recovery time for Alow than for Ahigh. All treatments decreased opercular rate and response to noxious stimuli. Alfaxalone residue clearance was greater than 80% from all tissues within 1 h, greater than 99% from muscle within 4 h, and 100% from all tissues within 36 h after exposure. We conclude that alfaxalone immersion at 5 mg/L for induction and 2 mg/L for maintenance provides a safe, viable alternative to MS222 for the anesthesia of rainbow trout.

Comparison of Effects of Capromorelin and Mirtazapine on Appetite in New Zealand White Rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus).

Inappetence is a welfare concern in rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus), as it can lead to potentially fatal gastrointestinal stasis. In other species, inappetence is commonly treated with appetite stimulants; however, few published studies have evaluated the efficacy of appetite stimulants in rabbits. We performed 2 studies to evaluate the effects of capromorelin and mirtazapine on appetite in New Zealand White (NZW) rabbits. In the first study, healthy rabbits ( n = 9) were evaluated using a randomized crossover design and 9 treatments: capromorelin 4 mg/kg oral (PO) once a day (SID), capromorelin 8 mg/kg PO SID, saline control PO SID, capromorelin 4 mg/kg PO twice a day (BID), capromorelin 8 mg/kg PO BID, saline control PO BID, mirtazapine 0.5 mg/kg transdermal (TD) SID, mirtazapine 1 mg/kg TD SID, and saline control TD SID for 3 d with a 1-wk washout period between treatments. Treatment efficacy was assessed by measuring daily feed intake and fecal output and by weighing rabbits twice a week. Overall, feed intake and fecal output were higher for all treatments as compared with controls, except for fecal output in the capromorelin 4 mg/kg and 8 mg/kg PO SID groups. Feed intake and fecal output were significantly higher with mirtazapine as compared with capromorelin. Body weight and erythema/petechia of the pinnae were greater in the mirtazapine 1 mg/kg TD SID group than in the control group. A second study evaluated rabbits that had undergone surgery (castration, n = 7) and then received one of 3 treatments: capromorelin 8 mg/kg PO BID, mirtazapine 1 mg/kg TD SID, or saline PO BID for 3 d postoperatively. Feed intake and fecal output in the postoperative mirtazapine group were not significantly different from those of the capromorelin and control groups. Due to its superior efficacy as compared with capromorelin in healthy NZW rabbits, we recommend considering mirtazapine as a treatment for inappetence in NZW rabbits.