Kosin Med J.  2022 Dec;37(4):271-277. 10.7180/kmj.22.139.

Considerations for experimental animal ethics in the research planning and evaluation process

• Shim J
• Kim J

• KMID: 2538857
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.7180/kmj.22.139

Abstract

Research using experimental animals has substantially contributed to advances in science and medicine. Animal experiments are nearly essential for biomedical research and development efforts. Because many animals are sacrificed, researchers should consider the welfare of experimental animals and related ethical issues, along with the successful results of their experiments. This review introduces the criteria that should be considered in terms of experimental animal ethics, based on the principles of the 3 R’s: replacement, representing careful consideration of the need for animal experiments; reduction, representing the use of the minimal number of animals to obtain meaningful experimental results; and refinement, representing continuous effects to find alternative methods to reduce pain and distress in experimental animals. Based on these principles, the following points should be considered when planning experiments: the necessity of animal experiments; alternatives to animal experiments; the relevance of the species and numbers of experimental animals; appropriate assessment and management of pain; the proper usage of sedatives, painkillers, and anesthesia; and valid timing for humane endpoints and euthanasia. These criteria are beneficial for both experimental animals and researchers because careful handling to ensure experimental animal welfare guarantees that scientific research will yield convincing, repeatable, and accurate results.

Keyword

Ethics; Research animals; 3 R’s principle

Figure

• 

  Fig. 1. Criteria for the 3 R’s.

Reference

References

1. Russell WMS, Burch RL. The principles of humane experimental technique. London: Methuen;1959.

2. Taylor K, Alvarez LR. An estimate of the number of animals used for scientific purposes worldwide in 2015. Altern Lab Anim. 2019; 47:196–213.

3. Festing S, Wilkinson R. The ethics of animal research: talking point on the use of animals in scientific research. EMBO Rep. 2007; 8:526–30.

4. Smith AJ. Guidelines for planning and conducting high-quality research and testing on animals. Lab Anim Res. 2020; 36:21.

5. Shamoo AE, Resnik DB. Responsible conduct of research. London: Oxford University Press;2009.

6. European Commission. EURL-ECVAM: European Union Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing [Internet]. Brussels: European Commission; c2022 [cited 2022 Dec 7]. https://data.jrc.ec.europa.eu/collection/id-0088.

7. ZEBET. Database for Alternative Methods to Animal Experiments of the Centre for Documentation and Evaluation of Alternatives to Animal Experiments [Internet]. ZEBET; c2000 [cited 2022 Dec 7]. https://apps.bfr.bund.de/animalt-zebet/index.cfm.

8. Edrey YH, Hanes M, Pinto M, Mele J, Buffenstein R. Successful aging and sustained good health in the naked mole rat: a long-lived mammalian model for biogerontology and biomedical research. ILAR J. 2011; 52:41–53.

9. Piper MDW, Partridge L. Drosophila as a model for ageing. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis. 2018; 1864(9 Pt A):2707–17.

10. Linford NJ, Bilgir C, Ro J, Pletcher SD. Measurement of lifespan in Drosophila melanogaster. J Vis Exp. 2013; (71):50068.

11. Munro D, Baldy C, Pamenter ME, Treberg JR. The exceptional longevity of the naked mole-rat may be explained by mitochondrial antioxidant defenses. Aging Cell. 2019; 18:e12916.

12. Shaposhnikov MV, Guvatova ZG, Zemskaya NV, Koval LA, Schegoleva EV, Gorbunova AA, et al. Molecular mechanisms of exceptional lifespan increase of Drosophila melanogaster with different genotypes after combinations of pro-longevity interventions. Commun Biol. 2022; 5:566.

13. Giannakou ME, Goss M, Junger MA, Hafen E, Leevers SJ, Partridge L. Long-lived Drosophila with overexpressed dFOXO in adult fat body. Science. 2004; 305:361.

14. Kapahi P, Zid BM, Harper T, Koslover D, Sapin V, Benzer S. Regulation of lifespan in Drosophila by modulation of genes in the TOR signaling pathway. Curr Biol. 2004; 14:885–90.

15. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for industry and other stakeholders: toxicological principles for the safety assessment of food ingredients. Redbook 2000. Rockville: U.S. Food and Drug Administration;2007.

16. Han EH, Lim MK, Lee SH, Rahman MM, Lim YH. An oral toxicity test in rats and a genotoxicity study of extracts from the stems of Opuntia ficus-indica var. saboten. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2019; 19:31.

17. Demers G, Griffin G, De Vroey G, Haywood JR, Zurlo J, Bedard M. Animal research: harmonization of animal care and use guidance. Science. 2006; 312:700–1.

18. Leary S, Underwood W, Anthony R, Cartner S, Grandin T, Greenacre C, et al. AVMA guidelines for the euthanasia of animals: 2020 edition [Internet]. Schaumburg: American Veterinary Medical Association; c2020 [cited 2022 Dec 7]. https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2020-02/Guidelines-on-Euthanasia-2020.pdf.