No abstract

SummaryNew ventilated caging systems for laborat ory animals were compared with conventional caging regarding allergen distribution, ergonomic suitability, cage environment and animal welfare. T his paper presents occupational health evaluations.Mice were placed in individually ventilated cage (IVC ) systems, a ventilat ed cabinet, and in cages on open shelves (conventional husbandry). T he IVC systems were studied at negative and positive air¯ow. Aeroallergens were sampled on ®lters (nˆ204, including controls) in undisturbed rooms and during cage changing. Concentrations of mouse urinary allergen (Mus m 1) in ®lter eluates were measured using sandwich ELISA. An ergonomic evaluation was performed with measurement of traction forces.Staff exposure during cage changing was high in all systems, range 116±4430 ng Mus m 1=m 3 . In undisturbed animal rooms, allergen levels were orders of magnit ude higher when using conventional caging compared with ventilated systems; P < 0.001. At positive pressure, both IVCs leaked allergen (median Mus m 1 concentration was < 0.08 ng=m 3 at negative, but 6.5 ng=m 3 (IVC1) and 0.8 ng=m 3 (IVC2S) at positive pressure). T he IVC systems had ergonomic disadvantages compared with the conventional husbandry and the ventilated cabinet, for instance with cages in unsuitable working heights.Ventilated husbandry solutions reduce levels of airborne allergen substantially at negative pressure, but are ergonomically less suitable. To prevent allergen exposure during cage changing, we propose that this procedure should be performed under ventilated conditions. Producers and users must cooperate in optimizing anim al caging systems for both anim als and staff.

Abstract:The objective of this study was to compare the results of three nociceptive tests, tail-flick, hot-plate and electrical stimulation vocalisation, reflecting the responses from different sites in the CNS. A subcutaneous morphine dose (5 mgl kg) was administered to three parallel groups of rats in which the nociceptive response was measured by one of the three methods. The baseline decreased during the period of measurement for the hot-plate test, but remained stable for the other methods. The spinally mediated tail-flick response was more sensitive to the morphine effects as compared to the supraspinally mediated hot-plate and electrical stimulation vocalisation responses. The electrical stimulation vocalisationtest demonstrated more even effect-time profiles and less variability among the rats than did the tail-flick and the hotplate methods. In the tail-flick group, 59% of the observations attained the cut-off latency at this morphine dose, leading to underestimation of the peak effect, the area under the effect curve (AUEC), and the variability among the rats. In the hot-plate group, 13% of the observations were at the cut-off latency, and 2% in the electrical stimulation vocalisation group. Different ways of presenting the data are discussed. In conclusion, the test selected for measuring the nociceptive response will influence the effect-time profile and subsequently any pharmacodynamic parameters describing it.

The use of individually ventilated cage (IVC) systems has become an attractive housing regime of laboratory rodents. The benefits of IVC systems are, reportedly, a high degree of containment combined with relative ease of handling, and a high degree of protection from allergenes. In the present study we tested whether two IVC systems (BioZone VentiRack, IVC1 and Techniplast SealSafe, IVC2S), in which we held mature male NMRI mice, were constructed to maintain a constant differential pressure, positive or negative, during a prolonged period of time. We also measured ammonia (NH3) concentrations after about 2 weeks of use, and CO2 build-up during a 60 min simulated power failure situation. In addition, animal weight development and bite-wound frequency were recorded (Renström et al. 2000). From the present study it is concluded that the IVC1 air handling system provides a more uniform and balanced differential pressure than the IVC2S. Both systems effectively scavenge NH3 when bedding material is not soaked by urine. Although the IVCs are dependent on the continual function of the fans to work properly, it seems unlikely that CO2 concentrations increase to hazardous levels, as a result of a one hour power failure, with the type of cages used in this study. Differences in weight development and bite-wound occurrence were noted between the two IVC systems. Causes for these differences could not be established and need more investigation.

The main aim of the present study was to explore the significance of large group/greater pen housing (PH) versus standard Makrolon caging (ST) in three behaviour tests related to human-animal interactions in the adult male laboratory rat. The rats' perception of human interaction was tested in three behavioural tests, of which two reflected common practical procedures, capture and restraint, whereas the third was a human approach test in a Y-maze. The rats' anticipatory reactions to handling and the reactions to restraint did not differ between groups, but the ST rats approached a human hand more quickly than did the PH rats (P < 0.01). Although food intake did not differ, ST rats gained more weight (P < 0.01) and had higher total cholesterol values (P < 0.01) than PH rats. In conclusion, this study shows that housing rats in large groups in an enriched environment did not influence their anticipatory reaction to handling in normal handling situations. However, as the PH rats tended to have a longer approach latency than ST rats in the Y-maze there might be underlying differences in appraisal that are not detected in practical situations. In addition, the PH rats weighed less and had lower total cholesterol values than ST rats and their urine corticosterone values were higher. These effects are suggested to be due to higher physical activity in the PH rats, and the implications of this on the animal as a model is discussed.