All the Pups We Cannot See: Cannibalism Masks Perinatal Death in Laboratory Mouse Breeding but Infanticide Is Rare

Perinatal mortality is a major issue in laboratory mouse breeding. We compared a counting method using daily checks (DAILY_CHECK) with a method combining daily checks with detailed video analyses to detect cannibalisms (VIDEO_TRACK) for estimating the number of C57BL/6 pups that were born, that died and that were weaned in 193 litters from trios with (TRIO-OVERLAP) or without (TRIO-NO_OVERLAP) the presence of another litter. Linear mixed models were used at litter level. To understand whether cannibalism was associated with active killing (infanticide), we analysed VIDEO_TRACK recordings of 109 litters from TRIO-OVERLAP, TRIO-NO_OVERLAP or SOLO (single dams). We used Kaplan-Meier method and logistic regression at pup level. For DAILY_CHECK, the mean litter size was 35% smaller than for VIDEO_TRACK (p < 0.0001) and the number of dead pups was twice lower (p < 0.0001). The risk of pup loss was higher for TRIO-OVERLAP than TRIO-NO_OVERLAP (p < 0.0001). A high number of pup losses occurred between birth and the first cage check. Analyses of VIDEO_TRACK data indicated that pups were clearly dead at the start of most of the cannibalism events and infanticide was rare. As most pups die and disappear before the first cage check, many breeding facilities are likely to be unaware of their real rates of mouse pup mortality.

To Group or Not to Group? Good Practice for Housing Male Laboratory Mice

Simple Summary

Wild mice live in territories inhabited by one adult male, several females, and their offspring. This cannot be replicated in the laboratory, so male mice are usually housed in single-sex groups or individually. However, there can be serious animal welfare problems associated with both these approaches, such as lack of social contact when housed individually or aggression between males when kept in groups. Group housing is widely recommended to give male laboratory mice the opportunity to behave as ‘social animals’, but social stress can be detrimental to the welfare of these animals, even without injurious fighting. All of this can also affect the quality of the science, giving rise to ethical concerns. This review discusses whether it is in the best welfare interests of male mice to be housed in groups, or alone. We conclude that it is not possible to give general recommendations for good practice for housing male laboratory mice, as responses to single- and group-housing can be highly context-dependent. The welfare implications of housing protocols should be researched and considered in each case.

Abstract

It is widely recommended to group-house male laboratory mice because they are ‘social animals’, but male mice do not naturally share territories and aggression can be a serious welfare problem. Even without aggression, not all animals within a group will be in a state of positive welfare. Rather, many male mice may be negatively affected by the stress of repeated social defeat and subordination, raising concerns about welfare and also research validity. However, individual housing may not be an appropriate solution, given the welfare implications associated with no social contact. An essential question is whether it is in the best welfare interests of male mice to be group- or singly housed. This review explores the likely impacts—positive and negative—of both housing conditions, presents results of a survey of current practice and awareness of mouse behavior, and includes recommendations for good practice and future research. We conclude that whether group- or single-housing is better (or less worse) in any situation is highly context-dependent according to several factors including strain, age, social position, life experiences, and housing and husbandry protocols. It is important to recognise this and evaluate what is preferable from animal welfare and ethical perspectives in each case.