Cargando…
The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific
Handling is a well-known source of stress to laboratory animals and can affect variability of results and even compromise animal welfare. The conventional tail handling in mice has been shown to induce aversion and anxiety-like behaviour. Recent findings demonstrate that the use of alternative handl...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7560820/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33057118 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74279-3 |
_version_ | 1783595157353922560 |
---|---|
author | Sensini, Federica Inta, Dragos Palme, Rupert Brandwein, Christiane Pfeiffer, Natascha Riva, Marco Andrea Gass, Peter Mallien, Anne Stephanie |
author_facet | Sensini, Federica Inta, Dragos Palme, Rupert Brandwein, Christiane Pfeiffer, Natascha Riva, Marco Andrea Gass, Peter Mallien, Anne Stephanie |
author_sort | Sensini, Federica |
collection | PubMed |
description | Handling is a well-known source of stress to laboratory animals and can affect variability of results and even compromise animal welfare. The conventional tail handling in mice has been shown to induce aversion and anxiety-like behaviour. Recent findings demonstrate that the use of alternative handling techniques, e.g. tunnel handling, can mitigate negative handling-induced effects. Here, we show that technique and frequency of handling influence affective behaviour and stress hormone release of subjects in a sex-dependent manner. While frequent tail handling led to a reduction of wellbeing-associated burrowing and increased despair-like behaviour in male mice, females seemed unaffected. Instead, they displayed a stress response to a low handling frequency, which was not detectable in males. This could suggest that in terms of refinement, the impact in handling could differ between the sexes. Independently from this observation, both sexes preferred to interact with the tunnel. Mice generally explored the tunnel more often than the tail-handling hands of the experimenter and showed more positively rated approaches, e.g. touching or climbing, and at the same time, less defensive burrowing, indicating a strong preference for the tunnel. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7560820 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75608202020-10-19 The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific Sensini, Federica Inta, Dragos Palme, Rupert Brandwein, Christiane Pfeiffer, Natascha Riva, Marco Andrea Gass, Peter Mallien, Anne Stephanie Sci Rep Article Handling is a well-known source of stress to laboratory animals and can affect variability of results and even compromise animal welfare. The conventional tail handling in mice has been shown to induce aversion and anxiety-like behaviour. Recent findings demonstrate that the use of alternative handling techniques, e.g. tunnel handling, can mitigate negative handling-induced effects. Here, we show that technique and frequency of handling influence affective behaviour and stress hormone release of subjects in a sex-dependent manner. While frequent tail handling led to a reduction of wellbeing-associated burrowing and increased despair-like behaviour in male mice, females seemed unaffected. Instead, they displayed a stress response to a low handling frequency, which was not detectable in males. This could suggest that in terms of refinement, the impact in handling could differ between the sexes. Independently from this observation, both sexes preferred to interact with the tunnel. Mice generally explored the tunnel more often than the tail-handling hands of the experimenter and showed more positively rated approaches, e.g. touching or climbing, and at the same time, less defensive burrowing, indicating a strong preference for the tunnel. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-10-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7560820/ /pubmed/33057118 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74279-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Article Sensini, Federica Inta, Dragos Palme, Rupert Brandwein, Christiane Pfeiffer, Natascha Riva, Marco Andrea Gass, Peter Mallien, Anne Stephanie The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific |
title | The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific |
title_full | The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific |
title_fullStr | The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific |
title_full_unstemmed | The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific |
title_short | The impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific |
title_sort | impact of handling technique and handling frequency on laboratory mouse welfare is sex-specific |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7560820/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33057118 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74279-3 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sensinifederica theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT intadragos theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT palmerupert theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT brandweinchristiane theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT pfeiffernatascha theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT rivamarcoandrea theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT gasspeter theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT mallienannestephanie theimpactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT sensinifederica impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT intadragos impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT palmerupert impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT brandweinchristiane impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT pfeiffernatascha impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT rivamarcoandrea impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT gasspeter impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific AT mallienannestephanie impactofhandlingtechniqueandhandlingfrequencyonlaboratorymousewelfareissexspecific |