The perspectives of UK personnel towards current killing practices for laboratory rodents.

Rodents are the predominant species used for scientific research and must be humanely killed upon completion of the work. In the UK this is regulated by Schedule 1 of the Animals Scientific Procedures Act 1986, which lists permitted methodologies considered capable of humane killing, including overdose of an anaesthetic, exposure to carbon dioxide (CO2) gas, dislocation of the neck and concussion of the brain by striking the cranium. Although all are permitted, operator motivations behind method selection and individual operator preference remain unknown. The views of 219 laboratory animal personnel on institutional availability and use of Schedule 1 killing methods for laboratory rodents were obtained. Only 10% of participants reported that all four methods were available at their institution with 57.5% of respondents preferring cervical dislocation. For CO2, only 18.6% of participants reported using the recommended flow rate, while 45.5% did not know the flow rate employed. We highlight the urgent requirement for the development of quality-controlled training programmes, to improve knowledge and confidence in the selection and application of killing methods. We advocate for continuous review of killing practices to ensure best practice is reflected in legislation and achieve optimal protection of the welfare of laboratory rodents during killing.

A decade on: where is the UK poultry industry for emergency on-farm killing?

Millions of poultry are farmed intensively every year across the United Kingdom (UK) to produce both meat and eggs. There are inevitable situations that require birds to be emergency killed on farm to alleviate pain and suffering. In Europe and the UK, emergency methods are regulated by the European Council Regulation (EC) No. 1099/2009 and The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing Regulations (England 2015; Scotland 2012; Wales and Northern Ireland 2014). Cervical dislocation has been reported to be the most widely used method prior to these legislative changes which took place from 1 January 2013. Based on limited scientific evidence and concern for bird welfare, these legislative changes incorporated restrictions based on bird weight for both manual (≤3 kg) and mechanical (≤5 kg) cervical dislocation, and introduced an upper limit in the number of applications for manual cervical dislocation (up to 70 birds per person per day). Furthermore, it removed methods which showed evidence of crushing injury to the neck. However, since legal reform new scientific evidence surrounding the welfare consequences of cervical dislocation and the development of novel methods for killing poultry in small numbers on farm have become available. Whether the UK poultry industry have adopted these novel methods, and whether legislative reform resulted in a change in the use of cervical dislocation in the UK remains unknown. Responses from 215 respondents working across the UK poultry industry were obtained. Despite legal reform, manual cervical dislocation remains the most prevalent method used across the UK for killing poultry on farm (used by 100% of farms) and remains the preferred method amongst respondents (81.9%). The use of alternative methods such as Livetec Nex® and captive bolt guns were available to less than half of individuals and were not frequently employed for broilers and laying hens. Our data suggests there is a lack of a clear alternative to manual cervical dislocation for individuals working with larger species and a lack of gold standard methodology. This risks bird welfare at killing and contributes to inconsistency across the industry. We suggest providing stakeholders with practical alternatives prior to imposing legislative changes and effective knowledge transfer between the scientific community and stakeholders to promote positive change and protect bird welfare.

Characterizing candidate decompression rates for hypobaric hypoxic stunning of pigs. Part 1: Reflexive behavior and physiological responses.

Alternatives to carbon dioxide (CO2) stunning for the commercial slaughter of pigs are urgently needed because there is robust evidence that exposing pigs to hypercapnic environments is associated with pain, fear, and distress. Hypobaric hypoxia (via gradual decompression, also known as Low Atmospheric Pressure Stunning or LAPS) has been validated in poultry as a humane option, but its potential to improve the welfare of pigs at slaughter is unknown. We investigated the potential of hypobaric hypoxia to reliably elicit a non-recovery state in anesthetized weaner-grower pigs within a commercially viable timeframe. We determined the effect of candidate decompression rates (40, 60, 80, 100 ms-1, at two cycle durations 480 s and 720 s) on a range of physiological and reflexive behavioral indicators of hypoxia and death. We found that the decompression rates tested caused a 100% death rate. As expected, the decompression rate had overarching effects on behavioral and physiological markers of hypoxia and death, with faster decompression rates resulting in shorter latencies to cardiac arrest and cessation of breathing. We observed a higher proportion of pigs displaying repeated and prolonged whole-body movements (likely indicative of convulsive activity) at higher frequencies when we applied the slowest decompression rate (40 ms-1) compared to all other rates. Since these responses may impact the carcass and meat quality, the slower rate of decompression (40 ms-1) should be excluded as a candidate decompression rate. Furthermore, given the marginal effects of decompression rate on physiological indicators of death and reflexive behavioral parameters, we also recommend that the fastest rate tested (100 ms-1) is excluded in further study on conscious pigs (to prevent conscious animals from being exposed to unnecessary faster decompression rates which may compromise animal welfare). This work represents a necessary proof of principle step and confirms the potential of gradual decompression for stunning purposes in pigs. Importantly, however, the data presented provide no information on the welfare outcomes associated with decompression in conscious pigs. Subsequent work should focus on the comprehensive welfare assessment of intermediate decompression rates to determine the potential of hypobaric hypoxia to provide a humane stunning method for pigs.

A review of methods used to kill laboratory rodents: issues and opportunities.

Rodents are the most widely used species for scientific purposes. A critical pre-requisite of their use, based on utilitarian ethical reasoning, is the provision of a humane death when necessary for scientific or welfare grounds. Focussing on the welfare challenges presented by current methods, we critically evaluate the literature, consider emerging methodologies that may have potential for refinement and highlight knowledge gaps for future research. The evidence supports the conclusion that scientists and laboratory personnel should seek to avoid killing laboratory rodents by exposing them to carbon dioxide (CO2), unless exploiting its high-throughput advantage. We suggest that stakeholders and policymakers should advocate for the removal of CO2 from existing guidelines, instead making its use conditionally acceptable with justification for additional rationale for its application. With regards to physical methods such as cervical dislocation, decapitation and concussion, major welfare concerns are based on potential inaccuracy in application and their susceptibility to high failure rates. There is a need for independent quality-controlled training programmes to facilitate optimal success rates and the development of specialist tools to improve outcomes and reliability. Furthermore, we highlight questions surrounding the inconsistent inclusion criteria and acceptability of physical methods in international regulation and/or guidance, demonstrating a lack of cohesion across countries and lack of a comprehensive 'gold standard' methodology. We encourage better review of new data and championing of open access scientific resources to advocate for best practice and enable significant changes to policy and legislation to improve the welfare of laboratory rodents at killing.

Determining Candidate Hypobaric Hypoxia Profiles for Humane Killing of Laboratory Mice.

Millions of mice are used annually in scientific research and must be humanely killed. Despite significant welfare concerns, carbon dioxide exposure remains the most common killing method, primarily because there is no practical and humane alternative. We explored whether hypobaric hypoxia via gradual decompression could induce a non-recovery state in anesthetized male C57BL/6 and Balb/c laboratory mice. We aimed to determine if this was possible in a feasible timescale with minimal pathological consequences, as a proof-of-principle step. Systematic evaluation of two decompression rates (75, 150 ms-1) and three profile shapes (accelerated, linear, gradual) in a factorial design revealed that hypobaric hypoxia effectively induced a non-recovery state in anesthetized laboratory mice, irrespective of decompression rate and shape. Mice took longer to reach a non-recovery state with the 75 ms-1 decompression rate (75 ms-1: 257 ± 8.96 vs. 150 ms-1: 214 ± 7.26 s), with longer latencies in gradual and linear shaped profiles. Accelerated shaped profiles were least susceptible to meaningful refinement via rate. The only pathological changes of concern were moderate middle ear congestion and hemorrhage. These findings suggest that hypobaric hypoxia has potential, and subsequent work will evaluate the welfare consequences of gradual decompression in conscious mice, to identify decompression profiles that minimize welfare harms associated with ear barotrauma.

Evaluating Pain and Analgesia Effectiveness Following Routine Castration in Rabbits Using Behavior and Facial Expressions.

Prevention of pain in rabbits is a priority for both welfare and validity of scientific data. We aimed to determine if the rabbit grimace scale (RbtGS) could be used as a viable, rapid assessment tool in two breeds of rabbit, Dutch belted (DB) and New Zealand white (NZW), following orchidectomy, as an adjunct to behavioral analysis. All animals received analgesia. Rabbits were filmed and their behavior was recorded at multiple time points pre- and post-orchidectomy. Observers then scored specific pain associated behaviors for analysis. Time matched footage was also scored using the rabbit grimace scale (RbtGS). Following surgery, rabbits showed significant increases in the duration spent displaying key pain associated behaviors at 1 and 5 h post-surgery. DB rabbits that received low dose meloxicam (0.2 mg/kg) showed significantly more pain behaviors at 1 and 5 h post-surgery compared to those administered a combination of higher dose meloxicam (0.6 mg/kg) and a lidocaine/bupivacaine local infusion. DB rabbits showed an increase in RbtGS score at both 1 and 5 h post-surgery. In the NZW rabbits, an increase in RbtGS score was only observed at 1 h post-surgery. Using behavioral analysis as the gold standard for comparison, the RbtGS was an effective means of determining when rabbits are painful following orchidectomy. Higher dose meloxicam (0.6 mg/kg) combined with local anesthetic was a more effective method of reducing pain, compared to lower dose meloxicam (0.2 mg/kg) alone.

Negative mood affects the expression of negative but not positive emotions in mice.

Whether and to what extent animals experience emotions is crucial for understanding their decisions and behaviour, and underpins a range of scientific fields, including animal behaviour, neuroscience, evolutionary biology and animal welfare science. However, research has predominantly focused on alleviating negative emotions in animals, with the expression of positive emotions left largely unexplored. Therefore, little is known about positive emotions in animals and how their expression is mediated. We used tail handling to induce a negative mood in laboratory mice and found that while being more anxious and depressed increased their expression of a discrete negative emotion (disappointment), meaning that they were less resilient to negative events, their capacity to express a discrete positive emotion (elation) was unaffected relative to control mice. Therefore, we show not only that mice have discrete positive emotions, but that they do so regardless of their current mood state. Our findings are the first to suggest that the expression of discrete positive and negative emotions in animals is not equally affected by long-term mood state. Our results also demonstrate that repeated negative events can have a cumulative effect to reduce resilience in laboratory animals, which has significant implications for animal welfare.

Handling method alters the hedonic value of reward in laboratory mice.

Mice are the most widely used model species for drug discovery and scientific research. Consequently, it is important to refine laboratory procedures and practices to ensure high standards of welfare and scientific data quality. Recent studies have identified that the standard practice of handling laboratory mice by their tails increases behaviours indicative of anxiety, which can be overcome by handling mice using a tunnel. However, despite clear negative effects on mice's behaviour, tunnel handling has yet to be widely implemented. In this study, we provide the first evidence that tail handling also reduces mice's responses to reward. Anhedonia is a core symptom of clinical depression, and is measured in rodents by assessing how they consume a sucrose solution: depressed mice consume less sucrose and the size of their licking bouts when drinking (their 'lick cluster sizes') also tend to be smaller. We found that tail handled mice showed more anhedonic responses in both measures compared to tunnel handled mice, indicative of a decreased responsiveness to reward and potentially a more depressive-like state. Our findings have significant implications for the welfare of laboratory mice as well as the design and interpretation of scientific studies, particularly those investigating or involving reward.