The Use of Animal Models in Behavioural Neuroscience Research

Abstract

Animal models are used in experiments in the behavioural neurosciences that aim to contribute to the prevention and treatment of cognitive and affective disorders in human beings, such as anxiety and depression. Ironically, those animals that are likely to be the best models for psychopathology are also likely to be considered the ones that are most morally problematic to use, if it seems probable that (and if indeed they are initially selected as models because) they have experiences that are similar to human experiences that we have strong reasons to avoid causing, and indeed aim to alleviate (such as pain, anxiety or sadness). In this paper, against the background of contemporary discussions in animal ethics and the philosophy of animal minds, we discuss the views that it is morally permissible to use animals in these kinds of experiments, and that it is better to use less cognitively complex animals (such as zebrafish) than more complex animals (such as dogs). First, we criticise some justifications for the claim that human beings and more complex animals have higher moral status. We argue that contemporary approaches that attribute equal moral status to all beings that are capable of conscious strivings strivings (e.g. avoiding pain and anxiety; aiming to eat and play) are based on more plausible assumptions. Second, we argue that it is problematic to assume that less cognitively complex animals have a lesser sensory and emotional experience than more complex beings across the board. In specific cases, there might be good reasons to assume that more complex beings would be harmed more by a specific physical or environmental intervention, but it might also be that they sometimes are harmed less because of a better ability to cope. Determining whether a specific experiment is justified is therefore a complex issue. Our aim in this chapter is to stimulate further reflection on these common assumptions behind the use of animal models for psychopathologies. In order to be able to draw more definite conclusions, more research will have to be done on the influence of cognitive complexity on the experience of (human and non-human) animals.

Internal consistency and compatibility of the 3Rs and 3Vs principles for project evaluation of animal research

“…46,55 Whether the capacity for suffering varies among vertebrates (or mammals) is highly controversial from both a biological and a philosophical point of view. 46,[56][57][58] Nevertheless, a hierarchy is commonly applied, placing primates, dogs and cats above other mammals, mammals above birds and birds above fish. Although animal welfare legislations generally protect all vertebrates (and some invertebrates), some specific regulations exist for 'higher mammals', such as primates, dogs and cats.…”

“…More research into species differences regarding their capacity for suffering, 56 as well as research into the ethical foundation of species hierarchies, is needed to settle this issue. 57 Since there is no strong relationship between construct validity and sample size, there is little scope for conflicts between construct validity and reduction. There are, however, potential conflicts between construct validity and refinement.…”

The effect of ketamine on microglia and proinflammatory cytokines in the hippocampus of depression-like rat

“…There are limitations in methodology and ethics on the human central nervous system. Therefore, the establishment of animal model about CNS disorders is widely used for further research [16,17]. CUMS model is widely used in depression research [18].…”

Zebrafish models for functional and toxicological screening of nanoscale drug delivery systems: promoting preclinical applications

“…The regulation of animal use in research is becoming more stringent [53,54]. For example, in Europe, animals cannot be tested after 7 days post-fertilization.…”