Comment on 'The ethics of animal research' by Festing & Wilkinson

Rationale, Relevance, and Limits of Stress-Induced Psychopathology in Rodents as Models for Psychiatry Research: An Introductory Overview

Emotional and cognitive information processing represent higher-order brain functions. They require coordinated interaction of specialized brain areas via a complex spatial and temporal equilibrium among neuronal cell-autonomous, circuitry, and network mechanisms. The delicate balance can be corrupted by stressful experiences, increasing the risk of developing psychopathologies in vulnerable individuals. Neuropsychiatric disorders affect twenty percent of the western world population, but therapies are still not effective for some patients. Elusive knowledge of molecular pathomechanisms and scarcity of objective biomarkers in humans present complex challenges, while the adoption of rodent models helps to improve our understanding of disease correlate and aids the search for novel pharmacological targets. Stress administration represents a strategy to induce, trace, and modify molecular and behavioral endophenotypes of mood disorders in animals. However, a mouse or rat model will only display one or a few endophenotypes of a specific human psychopathology, which cannot be in any case recapitulated as a whole. To override this issue, shared criteria have been adopted to deconstruct neuropsychiatric disorders, i.e., depression, into specific behavioral aspects, and inherent neurobiological substrates, also recognizable in lower mammals. In this work, we provide a rationale for rodent models of stress administration. In particular, comparing each rodent model with a real-life human traumatic experience, we intend to suggest an introductive guide to better comprehend and interpret these paradigms.

Ethics in Animal-Based Research

In recent years, there have been a number of new demands and regulations which have reignited the discussion on ethics in animal-based research. In the light of this development, the present review first presents an overview of underlying core ethical questions and issues. This is followed by an outline of the current discussion on whether animals (used for experimentation) should have rights ascribed to them and whether animals need to have certain characteristics in order to be the beneficiaries of rights. The discourse on concepts of sentience and the 'sociozoological scale' in particular is mapped out in this regard. There follows an outline of relevant ethical positions and current moral approaches to animal-based research (animal rights position, utilitarianism, 'convergence position', intrinsic cultural value of fundamental research, 'contractarianism', anthropocentrism, principle of the three Rs).