Search

The effect of providing additional floor space on cat behavior and welfare is not well documented. This study involved replication of an investigation of cats’ responses to enhanced cage and room environments using cages of 0.56 m2with the same methodology but an increased space allowance of 1.1 m2. Singly housed adult cats (n= 59) were randomly assigned to a treatment group that was a combination of a managed or unmanaged room and an enriched or unenriched cage environment. Cats were observed for 2 days for maintenance, affiliative, and avoidant behaviors using scan sampling and 5-min, continuous focal sampling. At the end of Day 2, cats’ reactions to the approach of an unfamiliar person were assessed. Cats housed in enriched/managed environments exhibited more maintenance and affiliative behaviors and fewer avoidant behaviors than cats in unmanaged/unenriched environments, suggesting that macro and micro environments may be equally relevant to the cat. Increased space did not enhance the cats’ welfare outcomes, suggesting that the provision of additional cage space may not be as important to the cat as a managed housing environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fecal corticosterone concentration (FCC) is increasingly being used as a noninvasive indicator of stress in assessment of nonhuman animal welfare. The aim of this study was to evaluate effects of breed, cage type, reproductive phase, and their interactions on FCC levels in doe rabbits. A total of 252 doe rabbits were randomly assigned to 2 groups. Does were individually housed in either standard dimension cages (SC) or in cages with a volume more than double that of the SC. Bigger cages (BC) were equipped with a plastic foot mat. Breed, cage type, and reproductive phase significantly affected FCC. New Zealand hybrids showed higher FCCs (p <.001) when compared witho the autochthonous breed (27.77 ± 0.47 vs. 24.61 ± 0.36 pg g−1, respectively). Increased cage size coupled with a plastic foot mat resulted in a significant decrease in doe FCC. The highest FCCs were detected at partum (BC: 30.40 ± 0.81 pg g−1; SC: 33.36 ± 0.86 pg g−1; p ≤.05), followed by postweaning (BC: 25.09 ± 0.95 pg g−1; SC: 27.63 ± 0.95 pg g−1; p ≤.05). These results support the hypothesis that measurement of FCC provides a useful indicator of chronic stress in doe rabbits. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In “Laboratory Rodent Welfare: Thinking Outside the Cage,” Balcombe (2010/this issue) suggests that laboratory cage housing is damaging to rats and mice because it does not meet their evolved needs and may damage their psychological and physical health. The article also indicates that larger and more enriched spaces reduce aggression and mortality and improve the health and friendliness of rodents in the laboratory. Remarkably, many of the studies cited as supporting these assertions fail to provide data bearing on the issues involved or may even report findings opposite to those described by Balcombe, whereas many studies that are highly relevant to these issues are not cited or described. Moreover, although the “evolved needs” of rats and mice are presented as the basis for an analysis of rodent welfare, the important and well-documented changes in needs- or motivation-related behaviors of a rodent in the laboratory (due to human selection over hundreds of generations) is ignored. This pattern of disconnections between data and conclusions is so pervasive as to demolish the scientific value of the exposition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This commentary presents the case against housing rats and mice in laboratory cages; the commentary bases its case on their sentience, natural history, and the varied detriments of laboratory conditions. The commentary gives 5 arguments to support this position: (a) rats and mice have a high degree of sentience and can suffer, (b) laboratory environments cause suffering, (c) rats and mice in the wild have discrete behavioral needs, (d) rats and mice bred for many generations in the laboratory retain these needs, and (e) these needs are not met in laboratory cages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Nonhuman primates are frequently housed in double-tier arrangements with significant differences between the environments of the upper and lower-row cages. Although several studies have investigated whether this arrangement alters monkeys' behavior, no studies have addressed the two most notable differences, light and height, individually to determine their relative importance. This experiment examined how rhesus and long-tailed macaques allocated their time between the upper and lower-row cages of a 1-over-1 apartment module under different lighting conditions. In Condition A, monkeys' baseline degree of preference for the upper- and lower-row was tested. In Condition B, the lighting environment was reversed by limiting illumination in the upper-row cage and increasing illumination in the lower-row cage. In both conditions, monkeys spent more time in the upper-row cage, thus indicating a strong preference for elevation regardless of illumination. The amount of time that monkeys spent in the lower-row cage increased by 7% under reversed lighting, but this trend was not significant. These results corroborate the importance of providing captive primates with access to elevated areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Considered signs of decreased welfare—abnormal behaviors such as self-injury and self-abuse among nonhuman primates housed in the laboratory—may put into question the validity and reliability of scientific research using these animals as models. Providing environmental enrichment decreases the incidence of some undesirable behaviors but is often unsuccessful at ameliorating the most severe types of abnormal behaviors. To prevent such behaviors from developing, it is important to identify risk factors that provide insight into the causes of certain abnormal behaviors. This study confirmed previous research identifying nursery rearing, single housing, and time spent in single housing as important risk factors. Results also indicate that the number of cage relocations affects the development of these behaviors. In addition, this study presents new data on comorbidity of several abnormal behaviors and discusses possible reasons for these patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The improvement of housing conditions for mice by using environmental enrichment materials is of high concern for the scientific community. Plastic, autoclavable nest boxes are commercially available and ready to use for specific cases such as in individually ventilated cages, metabolic cages, or during toxicological studies. The aim of this study was to see if the location of the nest box within the cage could influence the mice to prefer and use it. Located on the cage floor or hung from the cage lid, a nest box (MPLEX, Otto Environmental, Milwaukee, Wisconsin), enriched the cages. The study concluded that the location of the nest boxes in the individually ventilated cage plays a significant role in the mice preferring to use it or to avoid it. It is also important to use environmental enrichment items that provide animals with the possibility of expressing their preferences and manipulating them in a way to cope better with their environmental conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this review was to compare welfare, health, and hygienic status of laying hens housed in furnished cages and in alternative systems. In alternative systems (floor housing and aviaries), birds have more freedom of movement and a more complex environment than in furnished cages. However, housing birds in much larger flocks in alternative systems leads to an increased risk of feather-pecking. Furthermore, air quality can be poorer in alternative systems than in furnished cages. This can affect health and hygienic status. There are only limited data on a direct comparison between furnished cages and alternative systems. Therefore, there is a need for an on-farm comparison of welfare, health, and hygienic status in these systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Physical cage enrichment—exercise devices for rodents in the laboratory—often includes running wheels. This study compared responses of mice in enriched physical and social conditions and in standard social conditions to wheel running, individual housing, and open-field test. The study divided into 6 groups, 48 female BALB/c mice group housed in enriched and standard conditions. On alternate days, the study exposed 2 groups to individual running wheel cages. It intermittently separated from their cage mates and housed individually 2 groups with no running wheels; 2 control groups remained in enriched or standard condition cages. There were no significant differences between enriched and standard group housed mice in alternate days' wheel running. Over time, enriched, group housed mice ran less. Both groups responded similarly to individual housing. In open-field test, mice exposed to individual housing without running wheel moved more and faster than wheel running and home cage control mice. They have lower body weights than group housed and wheel running mice. Intermittent withdrawal of individual housing affects the animals more than other commodities. Wheel running normalizes some effects of intermittent separation from the enriched, social home cage. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The size of an enclosure is an integral part of how well it accommodates a nonhuman animal's welfare; however, most enrichment studies concentrate on modifying the area inside the enclosure rather than enlarging it. It has been suggested that rats have little need for more cage space, but there is no empirical evidence about rats' need for space. This experiment provides preliminary evidence for the preferences of 5 male and 5 female albino rats using T-maze choices followed by 5 min dwelling times. The rats showed a moderate but significant preference for the larger of 2 cages (540 cm[sup 2] vs. 1,620 cm[sup 2]; binomial z, p. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Animals in the laboratory need the legally required “empty space” to meet their basic spatial requirements for postural adjustment, but they also deserve functional—structured —space for species-typical locomotor behavior and dynamic interaction with their physical environment. Primary enclosures of these animals traditionally are unfurnished, and there is no reason to believe that the biomedical research industry will change the status quo on its own accord. Rather than counting on the professional judgment of attending veterinarians, investigators, and facility administrators, the U.S. Department of Agriculture should explicitly require primary enclosures of laboratory animals to provide not only a specific volume of space, but also species-appropriate space structured for optimal use by the confined subject. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes the design and testing of a novel form of mouse cage enrichment. A cage insert was designed and developed to fulfill a number of enrichment goals pertaining to its effectiveness and practicality (i.e., to improve the environment of mice in laboratories while causing the minimum of interference to the husbandry and care procedures carried out by animal care staff). Behavioral and physical parameters were used over an 8-week period to assess effectiveness, with subjective opinions of cage cleaning staff and physical examinations of the inserts after cleaning being used to assess practicality. Results show that the insert was both a practical and effective form of mouse enrichment which produced a number of enriching effects without adversely affecting the animals, their environment, or the husbandry and care procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A survey of 96 primatological articles revealed that cage location of research monkeys is rarely mentioned, although the environment of upper and lower row-housed animals markedly differs in terms of light quality, light intensity, and living dimension. Not accounting for these uncontrolled variables may increase variability of data and, consequently, the number of experimental animals needed to obtain statistically acceptable results. This study concluded that single-tier housing would be an important refinement of research methodology. Such housing would (a) enable all animals of a room to use the "arboreal" dimension of their enclosure and retreat to "safe" vantage points above the human "predator," (b) offer all animals access to uniform light, and (c) provide more favorable conditions for professional animal care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article the author comments on the views given on his article "Toward Genuine Rodent Welfare." The author says that there is harms to animals in laboratories by appealing to the harsh cruelties of living in the wild. The author also says that the evidence is clear that laboratory life involves deprivations for rodents and they do not like being confined to cages, especially the small, barren ones typically used.