The topic of discussion for a meeting tomorrow of an organisation known as the Laboratory Animal Science Association seemed to me initially to be taking welfare to slightly crazy heights.
After all, although zebrafish are fast becoming the model of choice for many biologists, I thought that they were primarily used for study of the embryo and development – not too much scope for pond weed and treasure chests there. Even if adult fish are in labs there’s hot debate about whether fish actually perceive pain or discomfort as we know it; and how much enrichment does a fish need?
I was soon educated: one of the fastest Google searches I’ve ever done (’zebrafish’ and ‘enrichment’) returned a very pertinent article among the top hits, Evolution of Standards in the Care and Use of Zebrafish in the Jan 2007 issue of Animal Lab News.
It turns out that zebrafish use is expanding because (i):
"The primary reasons most often cited to explain the growth in the use of zebrafish are a comparison of the animal relative to mammalian models in its fitness for the purpose (the primary purpose being the description of human development and disease).”
Evolution of Standards in the Care and Use of Zebrafish, Chris Obenschain and Steve Aldrich in Animal Lab News Jan 2007
and (ii) they are a hardy species that can be bred and maintained in a variety of conditions. Therefore labs have developed their own procedures and conditions (1); some of which will be less ideal than others and so place extra stress on the fish.
This is a shining example of how seriously scientists and researchers take animal welfare – after all, members of the public care less about fish than cute furry animals, but scientists consider the needs of all species that they use regardless of the fluff factor.
This consideration – unsurprising from a community that works largely to alleviate human suffering – benefits people by producing good science: once the optimal environment is identified (i) labs can standardise conditions to make their results comparable (cutting down repetition of experiments), and (ii) stress can affect the results of an experiment meaning that the effect of the factor you wish to investigate may be masked or interfered with.
So aside from the ethical justifications (which would be sufficient reasons to improve the welfare),
Good welfare = better science = faster delivery of treatments
I look forward to hearing the conclusions of the LASA meeting.
------------------------------------------------------
(1) It is important to note that generalised standards of care do exist – zebrafish are vertebrates and fall under existing legislation – but currently less is known about their care requirements compared with well-established lab models such as mice.
<Wrap up...>
