The influence of facility and home pen design on the welfare of the laboratory-housed dog

Laura E.M Scullion Hall,Sally Robinson,John Finch,Hannah M Buchanan-Smith

doi:10.1016/j.vascn.2016.09.005

Laura E.M Scullion Hall, Sally Robinson + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vascn.2016.09.005

Copy DOI

Abstract

We have an ethical and scientific obligation to Refine all aspects of the life of the laboratory-housed dog. Across industry there are many differences amongst facilities, home pen design and husbandry, as well as differences in features of the dogs such as strain, sex and scientific protocols. Understanding how these influence welfare, and hence scientific output is therefore critical. A significant proportion of dogs' lives are spent in the home pen and as such, the design can have a considerable impact on welfare. Although best practice guidelines exist, there is a paucity of empirical evidence to support the recommended Refinements and uptake varies across industry. In this study, we examine the effect of modern and traditional home pen design, overall facility design, husbandry, history of regulated procedures, strain and sex on welfare-indicating behaviours and mechanical pressure threshold. Six groups of dogs from two facilities (total n=46) were observed in the home pen and tested for mechanical pressure threshold. Dogs which were housed in a purpose-built modern facility or in a modern design home pen showed the fewest behavioural indicators of negative welfare (such as alert or pacing behaviours) and more indicators of positive welfare (such as resting) compared to those in a traditional home pen design or traditional facility. Welfare indicating behaviours did not vary consistently with strain, but male dogs showed more negative welfare indicating behaviours and had greater variation in these behaviours than females. Our findings showed more positive welfare indicating behaviours in dogs with higher mechanical pressure thresholds. We conclude that factors relating to the design of home pens and implementation of Refinements at the facility level have a significant positive impact on the welfare of laboratory-housed dogs, with a potential concomitant impact on scientific endpoints.

Highlights

There are two crucial reasons to ensure the most humane use of dogs in scientific research: our ethical obligation to prevent suffering, and our scientific need to ensure that they are valid, reliable and predictive models
We provide evidence that modifications commonly recommended in good practice guidelines for the laboratory-housed dog, home pen design, environmental enrichment and inclusion of regular training and staff contact are important to promote positive welfare and Refine the lifetime experience of the dogs
The more positive welfare found in Facilities A compared to Facility B support the use of these Refinements at a facility level

Summary

Introduction

There are two crucial reasons to ensure the most humane use of dogs in scientific research: our ethical obligation to prevent suffering, and our scientific need to ensure that they are valid, reliable and predictive models. Russell & Burch, 1959, the 3Rs) guidelines provide frameworks within which animals can be used in scientific research, there remains a paucity of quantitative data on which to base best practice in the dog. The positive impact of Refinements to housing, husbandry practices and regulated procedures on data output has been demonstrated in several laboratory housed species such as rodents (Everds et al, 2013); primates (Tasker, 2012); and dogs (Hall, 2014), Refinement uptake varies across industry. Global dog use remains high (∼100,000 per year, Hall, 2014), yet the implementation of known Refinements varies considerably across industry and between countries. As the predominant use of dogs is the development of new medicines, it is critical to increase our understanding of effective Refinements

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion