4.5 Article

Behavioural responses of rats to gradual-fill carbon dioxide euthanasia and reduced oxygen concentrations

期刊

APPLIED ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR SCIENCE
卷 100, 期 3-4, 页码 295-308

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.applanim.2005.12.001

关键词

rats; carbon dioxide; hypoxia; euthanasia

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Carbon dioxide (CO(2)) is widely used for euthanasia of laboratory rats, but little is known about the pain and distress caused by this procedure. Physiological and human self-report data suggest that CO(2) may cause pain and dyspnea, a sensation of breathlessness and increased respiratory effort, at the concentrations used for gradual-fill euthanasia. However, previous studies examining the behavioural responses of rats have reported conflicting results. In this study, detailed behavioural responses of rats were examined during gradual-fill CO(2) euthanasia and during gradual-fill with argon to produce a similar reduction in oxygen concentration. Animals were randomly allocated to the CO(2) or reduced oxygen treatment groups (n = 8 for both), and were first tested with air exposure and then with treatment gas exposure on the following day. Observations were taken for 105 s before and after gas flow began (baseline and exposure periods), as animals had ceased purposeful movement within 105 s of CO(2) flow starting. Behavioural changes from baseline during gas exposure were compared to changes during air exposure on control days. In comparison to air exposure, CO(2) resulted in increased activity, rearing, touching the nose to the chamber lid, escape behaviours and vocalizations. A small increase in touching the nose to the chamber lid was observed when oxygen concentrations were reduced with argon, but no other behavioural changes were observed. These results suggest that gradual-fill CO(2) euthanasia causes distress in rats, and that hypoxia alone is not a major cause of this distress. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据