MS222 does not induce primary DNA damage in fish

Barreto, Rodrigo Egydio; Gontijo, Alisson M.; Alves-de-Lima, R. O.; Raymundi, Vanessa; Pinhal, Danillo; Reyes, Victor Alexis Valenzuela; Volpato, Gilson Luiz; Salvadori, Daisy Maria Fávero

doi:10.1007/s10499-007-9073-6

Cited by 25 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fish were euthanized by over‐anesthetization in buffered MS222 (Holloway et al. 2004; Canadian Council on Animal Care 2005;Barreto et al. 2007) and photographs taken to determine body length.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rearing Environment Affects the Brain Size of Guppies: Lab‐Reared Guppies have Smaller Brains than Wild‐Caught Guppies

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals bred for captivity often have smaller brains and behave differently than their wild counterparts. These differences in brain size have been attributed to genetic changes resulting from, for example, inbreeding depression and pleiotropic effects of artificial selection for traits such as docility. A critical question, though, is whether these differences in brain size are due to plastic responses to the environment, not just genetic changes. We observed a large reduction in brain size in first generation, lab‐reared female guppies compared with wild‐caught ones (19% smaller telencephalon, 17% smaller optic tectum). We then reared first‐generation, lab‐born guppies in environments varying in spatial complexity and size in an attempt to isolate factors that might increase brain size and change temperament, but no significant differences in phenotype were observed. The results of these experiments show that, although the environmental factors responsible for the effect have not been found, even first generation lab‐reared individuals can have smaller brains than wild individuals.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rearing Environment Affects the Brain Size of Guppies: Lab‐Reared Guppies have Smaller Brains than Wild‐Caught Guppies

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The most commonly used buffer is sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO 3 ), as a 1 : 2 ratio solution in tank water (Kolanczyk et al., 2003; Pirhonen and Schreck, 2003; Wagner et al., 2003). Although there are literature reports on the use of NaHCO 3 in distilled water (Barreto et al., 2007), the water used to anaesthetise fish should be taken from the environment (aquarium, sea cage, tank); distilled or deionized water should not be used, as neither possesses any buffering capacity (Smit et al., 1977). Bicarbonate‐neutralized MS‐222 at pH >7 results in faster (shorter induction time), longer lasting and more consistent anaesthesia with reduced recovery times (Ohr, 1976; Smit and Hattingh, 1979), while the use of unbuffered MS‐222 may cause serious epidermal and corneal damage in fish (Davis et al., 2008).…”

Section: Buffering and Storagementioning

confidence: 99%

Tricaine methane-sulfonate (MS-222) application in fish anaesthesia

Popović

Strunjak‐Perović

Čož‐Rakovac

et al. 2012

Journal of Applied Ichthyology

313

193

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tricaine methane-sulfonate (MS-222) is one of the most widely used anaesthetics for poikilotherms worldwide. This paper outlines its anaesthetic efficacy and dosage in fish and legislation for its use, fish stress responses to MS-222 anaesthesia and its effect on fish physiology and blood properties, pharmacokinetics, genotoxicity, immune response, potential interference with fish hepatic cytochrome P450 spectra, and its impact on nerve sensitivity. Key questions arising from the available data are analysed, such as regulatory constraints on its use, the need for the standardization of buffering protocols, and interdependencies of the factors impacting the specific applicative efficacy of MS-222. Current research has provided an abundance of data on MS-222 use in fish, although the applications within these studies are often impractical at the farming level. Specific emphasis is therefore placed on highlighting application strategies on a practical basis, presenting potential future research on topics that require in-depth analysis (preparation and storage of anaesthetic solutions, pre-anaesthetic sedation and stress reduction, cortisol response in aquarium fish, toxicity of MS-222 metabolites, and possible immunodepressive properties). Additionally, both from a scientific and practical perspective, it is necessary to have a better understanding of safety margins, induction, immersion and recovery times for many (marine and freshwater, farmed and ornamental) fish species in order to achieve optimal utilization.

show abstract

“…Welfare guidelines recommend the use of anesthetics during fi sh handling practices (e.g., weighing and measuring, blood sampling, electrode implantation) and some studies are evaluating such drugs for potential hazardous effects (Barreto et al 2007;Gontijo et al 2003;Yoshimura et al 1981; for a review, Neiffer and Stamper 2009, in this issue). Similarly, Johansen and colleagues (2006) have provided extensive guidelines for monitoring the health and welfare of fi sh used in research and described morphological, physiological, molecular, behavioral, and environmental methods for assessing fi sh welfare, integrating the three approaches discussed above to establish a comprehensive guideline for fi sh welfare in research.…”

Section: Scientifi C Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Challenges in Assessing Fish Welfare

Volpato¹

2009

ILAR Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Descriptions of feeling states in nonhuman animals have relied on indirect evidence from empirical data. Assumptions that fish do not experience suffering lack evidence and in fact contradict a large body of indirect scientific evidence and ethical concern. Why should the burden of proof rest on those defending the hypothesis that fish feel pain and other discomfort? In this article I address this controversy and describe typical methodsand the problems associated with themto identify animal welfare (feeling-based, physiological, and behavioral approaches intended to demonstrate feelings and welfare states). Then I urge a shift in scientific focus from efforts to either identify an internal state of well-being or determine whether an organism suffers, to efforts to identify conditions that promote a "good state" for an animal (i.e., a state it would choose). For this approach, I discuss preference tests and their implications for scientific research, teaching, aquarism, and fishing.

show abstract

MS222 does not induce primary DNA damage in fish

Cited by 25 publications

References 20 publications

Rearing Environment Affects the Brain Size of Guppies: Lab‐Reared Guppies have Smaller Brains than Wild‐Caught Guppies

Rearing Environment Affects the Brain Size of Guppies: Lab‐Reared Guppies have Smaller Brains than Wild‐Caught Guppies

Tricaine methane-sulfonate (MS-222) application in fish anaesthesia

Challenges in Assessing Fish Welfare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About