A semi-structured questionnaire survey of laboratory animal rehoming practice across 41 UK animal research facilities

Attending veterinarians improve the research capability and psychological well-being of researchers in animal research institutes

The use of laboratory animals in biomedical research has significantly advanced scientific understanding, yet it raises ethical concerns about animal welfare and the mental health of researchers Recent research has highlighted the potential for stress and compassion fatigue among researchers working with distressed animals. Attending veterinarians (AVs) are crucial in mitigating the pain and stress experienced by animals and, by extension, researchers. However, the impact of AVs on researchers' psychological well-being remains understudied. This study explores how AVs contribute to researchers' research capability and psychological well-being in animal research institutions. AVs oversee animal housing, health, and welfare; their involvement is mandated or strongly recommended in developed countries. AVs enhance animal welfare by ensuring proper housing, nutrition, and social interaction. They monitor animal health, educate researchers on pain assessment, and promote compliance with post-surgical care. AVs also contribute to researchers' well-being by addressing euthanasia procedures, which can be emotionally challenging. Programs for rehoming animals after experiments offer an alternative to euthanasia and positively impact researchers' psychological well-being. Moreover, AVs promote workplace well-being by fostering positive workplace cultures, offering peer counseling, and providing social support. Programs considering animal welfare and researchers' emotions are crucial for a healthy research environment. In conclusion, AVs are essential in balancing scientific progress with animal welfare and researchers' psychological well-being. Therefore, their role should be recognized as vital in achieving social equity that considers the welfare of humans and laboratory animals.

The "Second Life" of laboratory rats (Rattus norvegicus): Assessment of social behavior of a colony of rats based on social network analysis

Rattus norvegicus is a social animal and holds a significant economic value, considering its use in scientific research. Here, we use the Social Network Analysis (SNA) approach to study the social interactions of a group of rats held in a post-laboratory animal care facility. We collected interaction data during four study periods, for a total of 60 days. At the group level, rats presented two communities for each study period, consisting mainly of littermates. At individual level, we found that the rats preferred to interact with individuals of the same strain and laboratory of origin and with littermates. At temporal level, we studied how stable social interactions were over time. During the first study period, we found high social stability, whereas the introduction of new individuals in the subsequent period caused social rearrangements; however, the initial social stability was restored. Our findings have shown that studying the social behavior of rats using SNA is a valuable tool for advancing our understanding of the social system of this species, which has the potential to enhance management and welfare practices.

Survey among FELASA members about rehoming of animals used for scientific and educational purposes

Rehoming is an important fate, which should be considered for animals used for scientific and educational purposes, and which is highlighted in the European Directive 2010/63 EU. In 2018, the Federation of European Laboratory Animal Science Associations (FELASA) convened a working group to review current literature and identify existing practices with the aim of issuing general recommendations on the rehoming of research animals. In order to understand the number and species of animals being rehomed and which species and information to include in the recommendations, the working group launched a survey that was distributed among FELASA members, yielding 97 valid records for analysis. Most respondents of the survey considered the rehoming of cats, dogs, mice, rats, rabbits, pigs and minipigs. The most important issues reported by the respondents were related to availability/suitability of animals, availability of adopters and legal issues. Based on the data and information collected in this survey, the working group decided on the format and content of the future recommendations: a first section containing a general protocol for rehoming, addressing the issues raised by the respondents, and a second section containing species-specific information and advice about cats, dogs, small prey mammals, equines, primates, camelids and minipigs.

FELASA recommendations for the rehoming of animals used for scientific and educational purposes

Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 22 September 2010 states that at the end of a procedure, the most appropriate decision on the future of an animal previously used or intended for use in scientific procedures should be taken on the basis of animal welfare and potential risks to the environment. Member States may allow animals to be rehomed provided the health of the animal allows it, there is no danger to public health, animal health or the environment and if appropriate measures have been taken to safeguard the wellbeing of the animal. In countries where rehoming is permitted, it is the responsibility of the Animal Welfare Body to advise on a rehoming scheme which must include appropriate socialization in order to help facilitate successful rehoming, avoid unnecessary distress to the animals and guarantee public safety. This paper reviews the EU legislation, existing guidance, current literature and best practice to define rehoming, sets out general considerations for rehoming laboratory animals including socialization and provides practical advice on the steps required in a rehoming scheme. For those species most frequently rehomed, more detailed species-specific sections are included.

Why All Healthy Laboratory Animals Should Be Rehomed, No Matter How Small

This paper explores the ethical imperative of rehoming all healthy animals of sentient species after experiments have finished or when they have become otherwise redundant. We take into account disparate perspectives in animal ethics and see how they point in the same direction. We illustrate our case with our own rehoming experience from the joint Animal Welfare Body of Utrecht University and the University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands. The primary pilot proved successful, after which the principle of rehoming became standing policy and common practice. We discuss several challenges and our responses to those through continuous evaluation of the adoption program.

Rehoming and Other Refinements and Replacement in Procedures Using Golden Hamsters in SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Research

Effective vaccines are needed to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. Forty golden hamsters were inoculated with two promising vaccine candidates and eighteen animals were used in pilot trials with viral challenge. ELISA assays were performed to determine endpoint serum titres for specific antibodies and virus neutralisation tests were used to evaluate the efficacy of antibodies. All tests with serum from vaccinated hamsters were negative even after booster vaccinations and changes in vaccination protocol. We concluded that antibodies did not have sufficient neutralising properties. Refinements were observed at all steps, and the in vitro method (virus neutralisation test) presented a replacement measure and ultimately lead to a reduction in the total number of animals used in the project. The institutional animal welfare officer and institutional designated veterinarian approved the reuse or rehoming of the surplus animals. Simple socialization procedures were performed and ultimately 19 animals were rehomed, and feedback was collected. Recently, FELASA published recommendations for rehoming of animals used for scientific and educational purposes, with species-specific guidelines, including mice, rats, and rabbits. Based on our positive experience and feedback from adopters, we concluded that the rehoming of rodents, including hamsters, is not only possible, but highly recommended.

Two Worlds in One: What 'Counts' as Animal Advocacy for Veterinarians Working in UK Animal Research?

The concept of advocacy is of increasing importance to the veterinary profession internationally. However, there are concerns around the ambiguity and complexity of acting as an advocate in practice. This paper explores what 'animal advocacy' involves for veterinarians working in the domain of animal research, where they are responsible for advising on health and welfare. In focusing on the identity of veterinarians working in an arena of particular contestation, this paper provides empirical insights into how veterinarians themselves perform their role as an 'animal advocate'. Analysing interview data with 33 UK 'Named Veterinary Surgeons', this paper therefore examines what 'counts' as animal advocacy for veterinarians, considering the way their role as animal advocate is performed. Focusing on the themes of 'mitigating suffering', 'speaking for', and 'driving change' as three central ways in which veterinarians working in animal research facilities act as animal advocates, we draw out some of the complexities for veterinarians working in areas where animal care and harm coexist. Finally, we conclude by calling for further empirical exploration of animal advocacy in other veterinary domains and for more critical attention to the wider social systems which produce the need for such advocacy.

When research animals become pets and pets become research animals: care, death, and animal classification

This paper explores what happens to care, and decisions about ending and extending life, when research animals become pets and pets become research animals. To do this, we draw on in-depth qualitative research on (i) rehoming of laboratory animals, (ii) veterinary clinical research, and (iii) the role of the Named Veterinary Surgeon (NVS) in UK animal research. We begin by exploring how (in theory and practice) the ethical, affective, and practical elements of care are split in the research laboratory. We then investigate arguments for and against ending and extending animal life via clinical research and rehoming, highlighting how these activities bring norms and dilemmas around animal death in the laboratory and veterinary clinic to the fore. We conclude by demonstrating the value of investigating borders between animal categories for understanding dilemmas around care and death, and for contributing to emerging literatures within geography around animal care, death, and categorisation. Key contributions of our work include highlighting: how care roles can be split; the importance of considering speculative and in-practice elements of care; the context-dependency and multiplicity of practices of killing in the veterinary clinic and laboratory; and the flexibility and changing nature of animal categories.

Science, sensitivity and the sociozoological scale: Constituting and complicating the human-animal boundary at the 1875 Royal Commission on Vivisection and beyond

Arnold Arluke and Clinton Sanders (1996) have argued that human societies index both humans and animals as belonging to particular rungs of the social hierarchy. They term this multispecies ranking the "sociozoological scale". This paper will investigate how claims at the 1875 Royal Commission on Vivisection about the sensitivity of particular species and breeds not only reflected assumptions about human social hierarchy but also blurred the boundaries between the human and the animal in the process. It will further be shown how these claims were informed by 18th and 19th century humanitarianism, classism, scientific racism and evolutionary theory, and how these influences combined in claims-making about the relative capacity of particular animals to sense pain and ethical duties towards them that followed from this sensitivity. Particular attention will be given to the opposing efforts of commissioners Thomas Henry Huxley and Richard Holt Hutton to demarcate human and animal sensitivity and exempt companion animals from vivisection respectively. The paper concludes by considering the sociozoological orders constituted by the 1876 Cruelty to Animals Act, particularly through its focus on calculating pain, and the legacy and limitations of this constitution.