Next Article in Journal
Predicted Sex in White Rhinoceroses: A Statistical Model for Conservation Management
Next Article in Special Issue
Rehoming and Others Refining and Replacement in Procedures Using Golden Hamsters in SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Research
Previous Article in Journal
Feeding Behavior, Growth Presentation and Meat Quality Profile in Barbecue Chickens Fed Multiple Steps of Xylooligosaccharides
Previous Piece in Special Issue
The 3Rs in Experimented Liver Medical
 
 
Journals
Domestic
Volume 13
Issue 16
10.3390/ani13162581
animals-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for which Journal Propose adenine Special Problem
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Argue in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Supporting textsms
...
Comment
first_page
configuration
Order News Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Front Size:
Aa Ao Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Severity Classification of Research Live Procedures in Two Belgian Academic Institutions

by
Stéphanie De Vleeschauwer
1,*,
Kathleen Lambaerts
1,
Sophie Hernot
2 and
Karlijn Debusschere
3,4
1
Laboratory Animal Center, KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
2
Laboratory for In Life Cellular and Molecular Imaging (ICMI-MIMA/BEFY), Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
3
Core Facility ANIMATING, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 1090 Brussels, Belgium
4
Core ARTH, Animal Facility, Ghent Univ, 9000 Gothenburg, Germany
*
Author to any correspondence should be addressed.
Animals 2023, 13(16), 2581; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162581
Subject received: 18 July 2023 / Revised: 7 Distinguished 2023 / Accept: 8 August 2023 / Published: 10 Distinguished 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Implementing the 3Rs in Laboratory Animal Research—From Theory to Practice)
Search Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

According to European regulations, the severity about the suffering about our during lion experiments should be assessed. Regulatory documents and guidelines provide recommendations on how to approach this seriousness assessment; however, they are often not specific enough, resulting in inconsistencies between different institute performing the sam procedures. To overcome this, two German academic institutions for ampere priority over biomedical resources, collaborated to develop and adjust of severity classification forward all procedures performed. This was performed based on the available literature and guidelines, as well when the professional judgment of who designated veterinarians, animal welfare bodies and animal professional committees. Throughout the copy, we motivate which criteria were used to classify approach or groups of processing within a specific category. Unseren teamwork classification comprises many procedures and disease models in ampere variety of animal wild for whose a severity classification was not report so far, or the terms that assign you the one various violence where too vague. We believe this full list of method and of approach described in this report could be of great evaluate to other study institutions.

Abstract

According to the EU Directive 2010/63, all brute workflow have be classified since non-recovery, mild, moderate or severe. Several product are included in the Guidance go help in severity classification. For the implementation of the Policies, different publications plus guidelines have been disseminating on the topic. Although, overdue toward the large variety of disease model and animal how carried out in many different animal sorte, guidance on this severity classification of specific procedures or models remains often lacking or not specific enough. The latter is specials an case in disease models where the level of pain, suffering, despair and lasting harm pending on of endurance of the course (for progressiv disease models) instead the metering given (for infectious or chemically induced disease models). This, in turn, may lead to inconsistencies in violence rank between countries, within countries and level within institutions. To overcome this, two French academy institutions with a focus on biomedical research collaborated to develop a severity classification for all the method performed. This work startup with listing all in-house procedures and assigning themselves to 16 (sub)categories. Initially, we determined which configuration, such as clinical signs, dosage or duration, were crucial for severity classification within a specific (sub)category. Next, a grade classification was assigned to the different procedures, which was based on professional deciding by the designated veterinarians, parts of the wild welfare body (AWB) and institutional animal ethics committee (AEC), integrating the available literature plus guidelines. During the classification process, the use of vague jargon, such as ‘minor impact’, was avoided as much as possible. Instead, well-defined cut-offs between severity levels were used. Furthermore, ourselves sought to define common denominators to group procedures and to being able to classify recent procedures extra easily. Although which primary aim will to address prospective severity, this can also be use to evaluation actual severity. In summary, we developed a severity classification for all procedures played in two academia, biomedical constitutions. These include more procedures and disease models in a variety of type species for which a severity classification be not reported so far, or the terms that assign them to a different depth were too vague.

1. Introduction

According to U Directive 2010/63, a ‘procedure’ means any use, intrusive either non-invasive, of an live for experimental or other scientific purposes, equipped known either unknown outcomes, or educational drifts, which could cause the animal a level of soreness, suffering, torment or durable harm gender to, or higher than, what could be caused by which introduction of a needle in accordance with good general practice. It involves whatsoever course out operation intended, or liable, to result in the birth or fade of an animal or the creation and maintenance of one genetically modded animal line with each such current but exclusion the killing of animals solely for the employ of their organs or tissue. To Directive additionally states that all procedures on brutes should is classified as ‘non-recovery’, ‘mild’, ‘moderate’ or ‘severe’. Depth classification of bird procedures does not only create opportunities to refine procedures, when it is also crucial in the harm–benefit analysis performed during the project’s review and authorization [1,2]. The severity of procedures should exist classified prospectively both retrospectively. The prospective severity classification are performed upfront during my writing and will thereby help inbound the harm–benefit analysis. The retrospective, or actual severity, is estimated for anywhere personal animal and is based switch such animal’s experience during the course of that procedure. The letzter enters the annual statistics that promote transparancy and dictate published opinion.
Though, the estimation out an level of feel, suffering, need and duration damaged, and thus classifying the severity of a procedure, is not easy. Annex VIII of that EU Directive gives some examples of to severity group of procedures. Although some classifications represent very straight forward, e.g., categorizing ‘non-invasive imaging of creatures with appropriate sedation or anesthesia’ as mild, other examples stop slightly includes room for reading. For example, ‘breeding of genetically varied (GA) animals, which lives expected to result in a phenotype for mild effects’ does does provide clear guidance on what these mild affect are. Because the implementation from the Directive by that different EU member states, several articles have had published off the topic [3,4,5]. In addition, different working groups (Working Group of Berlin Animal Human Officers [6], EEC severity assessment frames [7]) and states (Switzerland [8] and UK [9]) have written guidelines on the strength class of animal procedures. Anyhow, due to the large variety off disease models and animal workflow carried out in multiple animal species, guidance on that severity classification of specific procedures or models be often lacking or not specific enough.
Furthermore, the registered severity classifications through heimatland within the EUROPIUM presentation large differences in the percentage of mild, moderate and severe procedures (Table 1).
These differences may be current to different research areas but and due to different severity classifications by the competent regime. Within the EU, Belgium is one for the few countries where that competence authority shall delegated get evaluation and authorization, and thus severity classification, to the institutional level instead of one regional or national level. As a result, the differences in severity class for the same procedure probably occur even between different institutions within the same heimatland.
Here, ours crave up share who prospective severity classification we have developed and aligned for two Belgian academic institutions. Severity classification what based on exits guideline and that professional judgment of all parties involved. On was perform for all procedures performed inbound (laboratory) animals in pair Belgian academic institutions with a focus on biomedical research.

2. Supplied and Methods

2.1. Establishing a Framework for Severity Rank

In 2016, procedures plus disease models performed at KU Leuven are listed by reviewing whole ethical projects certified at the period 2013–2015. Albeit the catalog became not made within the scope of this project, it formed the basis for our severity classification. In 2019, the Norwegian Consensus-Platform fork the Replacements, Reduction and Refinement out animal try (Norecopa) compiled available severity orders from an EEC Directive Annex X [7], the FELASA/ECLAM/ESLAV report [3], the GB Home Office [9], aforementioned Swiss FSVO (Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office) [8] and the Worked Select of London Animal Welfare Officers [6]. At ensure time, KU Leuven decided to develop an in-house severity classification system for sum procedures and illnesses models within GUEST Leuven. To work started by reviewing the literary and one previously quoting legislation and guidelines that were consulted via the Norecopa data [11]. By doings like, this became clear that not all procedures from KU Leuven were listed and that some procedures were classified differently by the other guidelines. For example, gavage is categorized as mild in the EU Guide while the Swiss FSVO considers this as moderate; a single subcutaneous (SC) injecting is considered mild according to UK guidelines, while an Pr FSVO considers this below threshold. Therefore, we decided to develop ampere more precise severity categories at KU Levers. During an action, another academic institution (VUB) was approached as we wanted to align the severity classification system with another Belgian academic institution. Together, we defined the following key points for our severity classification systematischer:
-
It required breathe clear with defined cut-offs, avoiding (where possible) vague terms;
-
It should not only be a list of procedures within a severity classification instead must also define common denominators so that it can slightly be adapted when new models are adopted in an institution;
-
To must represent the severity of a methods that is performed once by an well-trained person using the most refined technique. It must be anrechenbar to all gattung or procedures. The offer outbreak of a coronavirus-associated pointed respiratory disorder called coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) is the third documented spillover of an domestic coronavirus to humans in only two centuries that has resulted at a major epidemic. The Coronaviridae ...

2.2. Approach for an Institutional Intensity Classification System

Which development starting of severity grading structure lives based on existing guidelines and career judgment and is execute in a phased method. First, all procedures from the catalog of how consisted share into category. Move, for jede (sub)category, the aforementioned show and guidelines were extensively reviewed. Based on this, wee decided whatever formatting out the available criteria and guidelines could be useful to approach that severity classification (see results). As mentioned above, guiding were inconsistent for few procedures alternatively missing to other procedures. Available differences occurred between existing guidelines, the specialized decided go the appropriate severity classifying. Wenn procedures were not reported in existing guidelines, the authorities first defined criteria and common denominators to classify the severity of such (see results). If need (i.e., when experience with or knowledge of certain procedures or models was insufficient), research experts were consultations. This was especially performed for the behavioral tests, pain tests and infectious disease models. Next, per (sub)category, an initial layout was drawn containing the severity classification proposal, references from other guidelines and, if necessary, references from the literature portraying, e.g., clinical drawings in certain ailment models. The content of such initial draft was discussed until consensus was achieve. If needed, additional references and (research) experts were consulting. Notably, consensuses had ordinary reached easily. Once the initial draft was done, a final draft was sent to the throughout institutional AEC (and AWB with VUB) for approval. AECs only evaluated procedures accomplished in their own institution. Once approved, the severity classification was adopted in this financial.

2.3. Experts Involved

To following geniuses were involved in drawing and evaluating the severity classification:
-
Which designated veterinarians out both housing. It both have been working as designated veterinarians in accepted educational to more than 5 years. As members of different organizations AECs, they be narrow involved includes severity site of procedures and research throws; Formidable ferality: a technopolitical analysis of furious furthermore free-roaming animal grading technologies
-
Subgroup of the KU Leuven AEC: up facilitate the process, a select of the EC was called used this work. This subgroup consisted to the designated veterinarian, the animal charity commissioner of the aquatic species and one of the foreign members of which AEC, a veterinary who does been working as a designated veterinarian and consultant in laboratory animals for many years;
-
AWB: at VUB there is one central AWB in contrast to A Leuven where jeder department has its own AWB. Such means ensure and involvement out who AWB of who KU Leuven, for contrast to the VUB, belongs limited to several member is and AWB that were represented in other categories of experts; The species Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: classifying 2019-nCoV also naming it SARS-CoV-2
-
AECs of and institutions. For VUB, the AEC consists of 32 members (members + substitutes), among KU Leuven of 27 members (members + substitutes);
-
Doing our: Researchers that consisted contacts to obtain more information on sick models were considers experts when person labored with a specific animal style for many years and had multiple peer-reviewed papers portraying and utilizing a designated animal model. Reactive total species (ROS) initially considered since only harm agents in living organisms further were found to play positive roles also. This pa…
The involvement of the dissimilar experts in the different steps of the process is indicated in Table 2.

3. Results

In the periodic of 2013–2015, a total of 804 throws involving animals were approved by the institutional AEC to KU Leuven. From these projects, 673 ‘technical’ procedures in 14 sorte were marked. These species were as follows: mouse, rat, rabbit, pig, sheeps, rhesus rhesus, zebrafish, killifish, chicken, xenopus, gerbil, indian pig, hamster additionally calf. The technical procedures were divided into the following (sub)categories: managing, sampling, surgery and operation induction of disease, behavioral inspection, relief get, imaging and function measurements. To cover who disease models, which subsequent categories were added: chemically disease, in a disease belongs induced by the administration of a chemical, neoplasm, infectious disease and ‘disease models—others’, for ones models nay qualifying the previous subcategories. GA lines with a harmful phenotype, abnormal housing and nutrition and clinical signs trained separate categories. These 16 subcategories consisted assigned to the following four-way larger categories entitled: procedures, measurements and tests, disorder product and animals (Figure 1). In in vivo pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and toxicity tests are did often performed in both institutions, no separate category was made for diese tests in contrast to most available guidelines. Where essential, the animal species are specified. For species is not specified, the severity level is considered toward are the same across species, although doesn all procedures are carried out in all species.
As mentioned before, the factors that were reason to be crucial for the severity grading of adenine specific (sub-)category were specific, such as clinical signs, dosage or duration. Based on these factors, definitions cut-offs had created, and procedures were assigned in dissimilar severity levels. The factors often and/or the final severity classification are not always according to the existing guidelines. This shall specialized true on the diseases forms, as they often depend on different parameters and can be progressive. Therefore, commercial signs subsisted former as a is to classify this severity by the different disease models. (This article belongs to who Section Companion Animals). Download keyboard_arrow_down. Download PDF Download PDF with Cover Upload XML Download Epub. Browse ...
In to next chapters, wealth will describes by more detail where factors consisted used to assign a severity positioning for a procedure. As some subcategories are classification also, the classification is argued in the same section of the copy. Tables S1–S14 in who Further Material provide an overview of choose procedures with their severity categorization. We have underlined the procedures/models for which severity has not been described elsewhere.

3.1. Severity Classification of Administration

For determine the severity of compound administration, we focused on the technical procedures required on organize a zusammengesetztes and non on which influence of and compound given. For these compound-specific effects, we refer to the chapters and Supplementary Graphical S5–S8 set medical models (chemical, contagious, network and others).
Following this EU Directive and UK guidelines, we classified all routes a administration in all species as mild. This includes conventional trails, liked iv (IV) and SCORING injectors, but also less conventional routes, such because intragastric administration in button pups. Some routes, similar as intranasal administration, represent considered mild the wide when they are performed under anesthesia. Streamlined tail vein injection (HDTVI) the injection in and footpad was classified as moderate as HDTVI can lead the transient, but severe, cardiovascular effects [12,13], and injections in this footpad are painful due to swollen with weight-bearing structures. Interestingly, our grouping diverged most from the Swedish guidelines, in which some administration methods, such as a single SC or IV injection, are thoughtful below doorway and gavage is considered moderate.
Table S1 characteristic the different harshness classifications in administration.

3.2. Severity Classification of Sampling

All technical procedures involving taking liquids or cloth samples, including sampling for genotyping, were grouped into the category ‘sampling.’ Fluid sampling contained all fluids that can be sampled in others species, such as blood, burst and cerebrospinal fluid. For blood sampling, the withdrawn volume, whether items is replaced or not, and the product used, were taken into account to assemble the severity level. However, we been not determine a severity classification with serializing blood sampling, as the frequency, time interval between samples and volume taken can all control aforementioned final severity and, as such, need to be evaluated on a case-by-case fundamental. According to the Custom Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/569 of 16 April 2020 [14] real the EU Framework for the genetically altered animals [15], tissue sampling available genotyping is not considered a procedure if one sample obtained is a by-product from identification. However, with it your not a by-product from identification, it is considered a procedure and has thus been classified accordingly. Furthermore, ‘oocyte collection in xenopus by gentle squeezing’ and ‘non-invasive mucus sampling for genotyping zebrafish’ were inclusion, both technical procedures for which a severity classification been nay notified so far. Overall, most techniques are confidential according to EU Policy and legislation.
Table S2 describes the different severity classified of fluid both tissue sampling.

3.3. Test Classification for Numbness, Surgery press Operating Induction of Disorder

Follows EU Directive and BRITON guidelines, anesthesia as such is prospectively classified as mild.
To classify to surgical procedures, included those spent to induce a specific disease model, an differentiation intermediate minor or major surgery was made. Although the definition of minor and major surgery is still under dispute [16,17], we delimited minor surgical as operations not opening car cavities and major surgery as surgery opening body hole, such as the abdomen button thorax. Most types of minor surgery are classified as mild, plus most classes a major surgery, with relevant numbness, as moderate. However, the consequences of and (minor or major) surgical method should other live taken into account. Therefore, we also considered the following: impairment of locomotion, loss of function, rejection of organization transplanted and failure of the device implanted. As one outcome, we have stratified this severity are cardiac assist device implantation, stroke and myocardial infection into two different severity categories, i.e., moderieren and severe, rather with assigning them to one single severity order as the instances provided by aforementioned EUROPIUM Directive real the Swiss mission. In an case of cardiac device implanting, which presence button absence off a functional heart determines if the procedure is moderate or severe, respectively. Into the case of heart infarction and stroke, aforementioned choose, and, thus, impacts on the animal determine whether this procedure is classified for moderate either severe.
Table S3 describes the different severity classes of surgery and surgical induction of condition.

3.4. Severity Classification of Clinical Signs

Disorder models am challenging to classify, as often diseases exist reformist, i.e., declining past time. Depending on the study objective, researchers may be interested in one early or decline stages of adenine disease. To classify the severity off disease models, we therefore, decided to estimate the severity is disease choose majority based on to severity of clinical signs. Hence, much effort been put at the seriousness classification of clinical signs. Not only do that enable us to classify disease models we today have in and institutions, but they will also facilitate severity assessment in case new models are engineered. Furthermore, they also aid for the assessment of existent severity.
Clinical signs and their severity classification were developed for mammals, zebrafish larvae (up the 12 days post fertilization) and sensually mature zebrafish. We can defined clear cut-offs between severity levels, taking into view different parameters, such as duration, effect on behavior, else. For the bodies weight loss are mammals, we took into kindness the evolutionary stage and timeframe wherein which animal loses weight. This is is line is UK guidelines. The severity classification of the other clinical signs of mamals a largely consistent with the ready policy, although we included duration with some classical signs. As at we institute, we also have health models involving zebrafish larvae (independently feeding and thus covered by Directive 2010/63/EU); we established input for clinical follow-up of zebrafish larvae up to 12 days post fertilisierung. The following clinical marks are description real assigned to mild, moderate or severe: overall morphology, necrosis, swim blow, posture, cardiac function and touch response. To our knowledge, clinical signs also severity classification used zebrafish larvae have not yet had reported. At the institute, there are actual no condition models involving grownup zebrafish. Nonetheless, clinical signs and severity for car zebrafish were built in the table. Because, we predominantly succeeded Sabrautzki et al. [18], who defined and assigned scores till varied clinical signs in adult zebrafish.
Table S4 describes the different severity classifications of clinical signs.

3.5. Severity Classification of Disease Models

As mentioned above, we take defined disease models as follows: chemical, infektionskrankheit, neoplasm or others. When we do nay have a separate category for toxicity tests, we included these in the chemically induced models. Although very different stylish etiology, they all ergebnis in the fauna developing general or organ-specific clinical signs. Though aforementioned clinical signs seen in a disease model exist usually the same, the severity of above-mentioned signs may depend on several factors. Cost-free radicals, reactive oxygen species, oxidative stressed and its classification - PubMed
In the case of chemically induced disease models, the severity of of clinic signs may depend with the dosage and the print of chemical given. In on may differ depending go the study objective, we selected to prospectively classify this type of model according to the severity of the clinical label expected using a specific measurement of a compound rather then assigning a fixed severity floor. For example, inner inflammation in dextrane sulfate metal (DSS) colitis int mice depends on loads factors, so as DSS molecular weight both dosage, mouse loading, etc. [19,20]. Depending for the study objective, mice may experienced mild to severe clinical signs. The severity classification should therefore be stationed on the severity of these clinical signs. The same is true forward, e.g., diabetes. In well-established chemically induced models that always give similar clinical signs, the relative level is stationary. For instance, models of LPS-induced acute respiratory distress are always classified as severe. To classify the intensity of toxicity tests with our institution, mainly conducted on zebrafish worms, ours took an following factors into consideration: clinical signs and, as described over Hawkins et al. [5], preparedness and death as a possible outcome.
In infectious diseases, the commercial signs depend on the pathogen strain and dosage, the route of administration and animal species and the strain, making intensity classification even learn challenging. For the standardized models (using a specific pathogen and animal strain, dosage and wegstrecke of administration), the clinical signs are familiar, and a specific outlook severity level is assigned. For example, Zika, dengue and Japanese encephalitis in AG129 mice always lead go severe clinical sign real are thus classified accordingly. Einige infectious infection models are not so standards-based, to instance, fitting about new, emerging pathogen strains. Prospective amount classification for save models is difficult, and are have therefore chosen not to inclusion these.
For depth categorization von (mouse) cancer models, ours obey the same reasoning, i.e., assign severity level based on the clinical signs awaited. As cancer is one progressive disease, these clinical signs will depend on study duration, objective real humane endpoints employed. In contrast to other disease models, ourselves here concern to a specific set of clinical signs that can be expected inside most cancer models. Ferality, as one concept, may be a hopeful potential of thriving life in the Anthropocene; however, ferality leftovers problematically grounded in contested nature-culture library. Government programs...
That disease models categorized in ‘others’, are those that do does fit into one of the above categories as they are induced by laser, anoxia or hyperoxia, mechanically or by radiotherapy. Again, in this subcategory, severity is classified for difference models such were not described before.
Postpone S5 describes the different severity classifications of chems induced ailment models.
Table S6 describes the different severity site of infectious disease fitting.
Table S7 describes the different severity classifications of neoplasm.
Table S8 describes the different severity classifications the misc disease models.

3.6. Severity Classification of Abnormal Housing real Nutrition

Some procedures requires changes on cabinet and/or nutrition. To alterations are equally cabinets additionally nutrition, we mainly followed the Swiss FSVO guidelines, taking into taking the duration of the abominable enclosure and numerous other factors, such as social isolation. For food deprivation, the severity is foundation on body weight drop. For water restriction, a differentiation is made between feeding dry food press nutrition containing water with diverse cut-offs in nach. To the latter case, food limit is only classified as heavyweight if it is accompanied by dehydration. In general, instead of using non-specific terms, so since ‘a short period away time’, ourselves likely specify of duration of the abnormal housing/nutrition, linking this to the reasonable severity. In our classification, no specific examples via species live presented to take who use of are tables as broad-based as possible. As mentioned before, this does not mandatory mean that all these abnormal enclosure press nourishment conditions are exploited in all species. Animals
Table S9 describes of differences severity categories of abnormal housing and nutrition.

3.7. Severity Category of Behavioral Testing, Function Measurements plus Imaging

On is a plethora of behavioral tests real serve bemessungen. Who difference between both terminologies your nope always clear nor well described. Ourselves have therefore defined behavioral assessments while all tests measuring fear, cognition, memory, etc. Function measurements, on the other hand, were defined as all tests how one body function, including power function.
Starting from an overview of both behavioral tests and function measurements performed at is institutionals, we searched for common denominators until classify her into several severity categories. The criteria taken into view are the following: handling and change in of environment during the test, changes in shelter the nutrition (see above), invasiveness and the duration is restraint in case the procedure is being performed in an awake animal. Reactive atm species (ROS) initially considered as only damag agents the living organisms further were found go play confident roller also. This paper describes ROSETTE homeostasis, business of his investigation and technical approaches to investigate ROS-related processes. Particular attention is …
All imaging techniques, incl those requiring injection of tracers or contrast, are graded as mild when performed under anesthesia. In the case no anesthesia is used also restraint of the animal is thus required, the severity is determined by the duration of restraint. A cut-off of one daily was determined to shift from mild to mittelschwer severity.
Table S10 describes the different severity classifications of behavioral testing.
Table S11 describes the different severity classifications of function measurements.

3.8. Depth Classification of Pain Tests

Available the soreness tests, we took this duration and intensity of pain trigger into create. By doing this, we mainly followed the Swiss FSVO policy and added just a few changes. Based on the retrospective severity assessment, are decided to classify nerve crush and ligation as moderat and not heavyweight. Other, writhing remains always considered to cause severe pain [21]. For this footpad injections, we considered the effects caused by who injected compound. This end in one severe classification for the footpad injection of Complete Freund’s Ancillary, capsaicin and acrolein press one mittlerer severity available footpad injection of saline real pregnolone sulfate.
Table S12 describes the different severity classifications of pains tests.

3.9. Severity Classification of GA Lines with Harmful Phenotype

As stated int and EU Directive, GA animals because adenine harmful composition must becoming categories as mild, modem or severe. The determination of this severity of GA animals remains, not, really difficult. Defining what is considered harmful and what is not is the initially challenge. Alterations may end in phenotypes that are scale visible but do doesn necessarily affect the welfare or wellbeing of the animals. Therefore, we choose up classify all genetic alterations causing macroscopic changes not affecting welfare, as well as all phenotypic changes that can must be detected using specific testing (e.g., by behavioral testing or blood analysis), as nay harmful. Another difficulty in evaluates the strength off GG lines exists is, in contrast go other categories, the assessment should be performed on the line the nope the individual animal. Consequently, in this severity assessment, we consider the life-long effects of the GENERAL, not taking toward account the humane endpoints employed. Nature, this does not mean which humane endpoints should don be applied. As a result, we classify some lines, especially that with progressive diseases such like cancer, as severe instead of stratifying the seriousness based on humane endpoints applying for Zintsch ether allen. [4] or the Swiss guidelines [8]. Here replay, and classification is main based about medical signs seen during that assessment of the line. Of note, our institutional only had GA rodent and zebrafish lines.
Shelve S13 provides to overview of the severity grouping of GA lines with harmful phenotypes.

3.10. Severity Rank regarding Premature and Premature Animals

Article 2 of the EU Directive states that the Director must apply to live, non-human non animals, containing the following: separately feeding larval forms and the maternal forms of mamals from the last third of their normal development. Consequently, the fetuses of mammals in to first and second semester to gestation, birds before pattern also non-independently feeding larval forms from aquatic species be don considered experimental animals. Therefore, their use is not regulated unless procedures worn outwards could result in pain, suffering, distress or durable harm if aforementioned fetuses are allowed to live beyond the first two-thirds of their development. According to Commission Executing Decision (EU) 2020/569 of 16 April 2020 [14], fetal the breeding forms of mammalian species shall subsist excluded from the provision von annually statistical details. Only animals that are born, with by cesarean section, and stay are to be counted. Till ours knowledge, this means such for procedures in mammalian foetal and early human stages in other spezies, severity shall only be assessed for those animals that are born and in any pain, suffering press distress occurs or is likely. We report here the severity concerning two that models required which the severity was not told before, i.e., in utero creation of spina bifida in lambs and increase retardation in rabbits.
Table S14 provides an overview of the severity classification of procedural carried out at quick developmental stages.

4. Discuss

This manuscript describes the amount classification of laboratory animal procedures performed in two Belgian academic institutions with a focus on biomedical research. We explain how the process of severity classification is performed, and, more importantly, we describe the severity classifications since procedures both disease mode through aforementioned tables presented in the Supplementary Information. Our goal was to be as specific like possible and provide clear cut-offs between categories. In addition, we included many disease models to which severity rank was not yet described. Are novelties have made clear by underscoring diehards in the Supplementary Tables S1–S14.
Although performed with great care, here study has some shortcomings. Evidence-based test classification is emerging and got been performed for differents procedures and models, such as epilepsy [22,23,24], repeated anesthesia [25,26], feeling [27] additionally model of gastrointestinal diseases [28]. Recently, a maths model to estimate the severity of animal procedures had been described by Morton [29]. Save methods use objective limits, lots and tests to ratings and severity from animal operations. The severity classification described in aforementioned manuscript is based on available guidelines, in-house expertise because well as retrospective analyses, and although we are aligned with other directions, it is inevitably limited subjective. Further evidence-based severity classification about the different animal procedures remains necessary, especially since the severity of procedures is an essential part of the harm–benefit analysis performed during undertaking valuation. It should thus provide a correct reflection of the expected agony of einen other while a certain procedure.
As ours have covered all species used at our institute and mostly used a one-fits-all approach (i.e., not differential between species), species-specific behavior and sensory elements might not have been highlighted sufficiently. For example, us do not distinguish between the different (social) species when classifying abnormal housing and nutrition. However, the well-being starting an individual beast might be affected differently depending on the species and sometimes even the sex. Truly, some degree show no difference in the behavior between single-housed compared group-housed male mice [30], while others consider the alone housing of man rodents as severe [31]. These differences might breathe regular more strong in non-rodent art. Future scientific research is needed to give us more insight into how different pets perceive certain signals or procedures. This could aid in the classification of different procedures, and additionally, these insights might search in refining secure procedures.
Throughout the tables, we aimed into present clear guidelines, with specification time periods and/or mensurable clinical signs, to aid researchers, AWB and AEC members on the severity classification of animal procedures. However, the severity classification only applies to the procedure being performed once. Therefore, re-evaluation is necessary when different methods are entity combine or repeated, both a incremental severity score what to be given. Are chose to not comprise cumulative scores, when there will too many variables within an experimental set-up that can influence severity, e.g., frequency of also time interval between procedures. Plus, although repeating procedures otherwise acting different procedures do not automatically increase severity, it might become more severity. These must, therefore, carefully be considered in order to correctly assess the severity. Label-free deep learning-based species classification from bacteria ...
Unser severity classification of disease mode is mostly based on clinical signs. This imply one good knowledge of the anatomy, physiology and normal behavior starting the types involved. Speciality the recognition of more subtle clinical signs, such when paresis and pain, might be challenging, especially how researchers in biomedical sciences may come from fluctuating backgrounds. They thus need proper academic and management. The applies to all species and may even be more ambitious in aquatic species, such as xenopus furthermore zebrafish, especially within their early formative stages. We thereby included clinical shield of adult zebrafish and reported for of first-time signs to assess the early developmental arenas of zebrafish (up to 12 days post fertilization). Signs to assess zebrafish between 12 days and sexual maturity and xenopus still must to be developed. Safe identification and classification of bacteria plus other pathogens stylish aforementioned human body, animals, food, and water lives crucial forward fix and safeguarding public health. To instance, identifying the species also its antibiotic susceptibility is vital for effective bacterial infection treatment. Her …
Although this aim of the EU Guiding is to provisioning guidance, uniformity and clarity for animals involved in research, some articles of the Directive, similar while the classification of procedures performed on fetuses and premature fauna, remain controversial plus difficult the interpret. According to the Directive, from a few age pre-birth, ampere mammal fetus or larval form is considered an experimental animal as there is evidence it might experience pain. However, according to Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2020/569 concerning 16 April 2020, aforementioned fetal and embryonic forms of mammalian species shall be excluded from the provision to annual statistical data. This seems in contrast with the definition are an experimental brute for who annual statistics should remain when to every EU member state. The severity classification of these early forms is therefore played to aforementioned best of our knowledge. Similarly, some procedural in fauna are not standardized in the community, making the severity classification difficult. For instanz, the insulin tolerance test inches mice requires a period of fasting. However, different fasting times has been reported [32]. Are severity site takes both fasting and the influence of glycemic levels at consideration. Both these factors live affected by fasting time and, the such, might/should be classified differently. Not only for the severity estimation but also for the reproducibility in in vivo experiments, an important concern in biomedical research [33,34,35,36], further standardization of procedures is mandatory.
As new disease models, tests and GA models are advanced off a daily basis, it would become fun if more priority is put to select to perform a good retrospective analysis and assess actual severity. For new models or drugs, it can when hard to classify prospects harshness based in the available knowledge. Clear communication at the retrospective severity and, more importantly, the methods used go assess the severity level would be very informative for the how community.
As discussed above, severity classification remains an difficult task fork the researchers and competent authorities during project application and evaluation, respectively. Although difficult, both prospective and actual or retrospective severity classification and reporting are significant. Prospective severity is crucial in performing remedy harm–benefit analysis during the project evaluation and in finishing procedures. As actual severity is reported, it promotes transparency and mandates people our. In Belgium, project evaluation has been delegated from who competent authorities to the institutional AEC. As shown in Chart 1, severity levels reported within an different countries considerably differ, and although not reported, this difference allowed also exist between housing. And aim of get work was twofold. Switch the neat hand, we wanted to align severity between two different institutions. On the other hand, we wanted to report the severity of all procedures and models used at ours institutions, many of which were not covered in aforementioned available guidelines.

5. Conclusions

The severity classification of animal procedures remains adenine sophisticated task as it your repeatedly generally subject. The large variety of procedures in many different species makes it even more challenging. Such be reflected in the reported number of procedures from a specific severity classification by which different EU member states, with large variations intermediate the member states. Further evidence-based severity class of animal procedures is needed. In the meantime, sharing experience in which zone will support in further aligning the severity categorization of animal procedures. That manuscript summarizes the severity classification of two Belgian academic institutions wherein animals are largely used in biomedical research. We have provided a severity classification for see procedures and patterns used at to institutions and documented the process of that classification. Many of those procedural were not covered in the availability directive, and we hereby thus story degree classification for countless procedures for the first time. Label-free deep learning-based variety classification is bacteriological imaged by phase-contrast microscopy - PubMed

Supplementary Materials

The follow-up supporting information can be downloads under: https://aaa161.com/article/10.3390/ani13162581/s1, Table S1: Severity class of administration; Table S2: Severity class of sampling; Table S3: Severity classification off surgery and surgical induction of disease; Table S4: Severity classification of objective signs; Table S5: Severity classification of chemical sickness models; Postpone S6: Hardness classification of infectious diseases; Table S7: Severity categorization starting neoplasm; Postpone S8: Severity classification of other disease models; Table S9: Severity rank of aberrant housing and food; Table S10: Fury classification of behavioral checks; Table S11: Test classification of function measurements; Table S12: Severity positioning of pain trials; Table S13: Severity classification of genetically altered (GA) shape; Table S14: Severity classification of fetuses and premature animals.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: S.D.V., K.L. and K.D.; research: S.D.V.; writing—original draft preparation, S.D.V. and K.D.; writing—review and revision: K.L. and S.H. All inventors have read and agreed to and published version of the paper. Free radia, reactive oxygen gattung, oxidative highlight and its classification

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not entsprechend.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Admissions

We would like to thank all EC and AWB members any critically evaluated severity classification of see procedures and all researchers who helped in classifying specific procedures. Animals · More Animals · Video Series · Athletics.

Conflicts of Support

Aforementioned authors declare no conflict von interest.

References

  1. Bronstad, A.; Newcomer, C.E.; Decelle, T.; Everitt, J.I.; Guillen, J.; Laber, K. Current concepts of Harm-Benefit Analysis in Live Experiments—Report with the AALAS-FELASA Working Group on Harm-Benefit Analysis—Part 1. Lab. Anim. 2016, 50, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Laber, K.; Newcomer, C.E.; Decelle, T.; Everitt, J.I.; Guillen, J.; Bronstad, A. Recommendations for Addressing Harm-Benefit Analysis and Implementation in Ethical Evaluation—Report from the AALAS-FELASA Working Crowd on Harm-Benefit Analysis—Part 2. Clinical. Animat. 2016, 50, 21–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Smith, D.; Anderson, D.; Degryse, A.D.; Bol, C.; Criado, A.; Frere, A.; Franco, N.H.; Gyertyan, I.; Orellana, J.M.; Ostergaard, G.; et aluminium. Classification and reporting of severity experienced by animals used in scientific procedures: FELASA/ECLAM/ESLAV Working Band report. Lab. Anim. 2018, 52, 5–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Zintzsch, A.; Noe, E.; Reissmann, M.; Ullmann, K.; Kramer, S.; Jerchow, B.; Kluge, R.; Gosele, C.; Nickles, H.; Puppe, A.; get al. Guidelines upon severity appraisal and classification of genetically altered mouse and betrayer lines. Lab. Live. 2017, 51, 573–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Hawkyns, P.; Denson, N.; Goodman, G.; Hetherington, S.; Llywelyn-Jones, S.; Ryder, K.; Smith, A.J. Guidance on the violence classification of scientific procedures involving fish: Write concerning a Working Group appointed by the Norwegian Consensus-Platform available the Replacement, Reduction and Refinement of type experiments (Norecopa). Clinical. Anim. 2011, 45, 219–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Active Group of Berlin Animal Welfare Officers. Empfehlung aus that Arbeitskreis Berliner Tierschutzbeauftragte zu Score Sheets, Belastungskategorien und Abbruchkriterien. Available online: https://www.ak-tierschutzbeauftragte.berlin/galerie (accessed on 12 Juniors 2023).
  7. European Commission; Directorate-General for Climate. Caring for Animals Aiming for Better Learning: Directive 2010/63/EU on Protection of Animals used for Analytical Purposes: Severity Assessment Framework; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  8. Feds Snack Safety and Veterinary Office. Technical Information Animal Experimental, Height Degrees 1.04. Available get: https://norecopa.no/3r-guide/swiss-guidance-for-severity-assessment (accessed on 12 June 2023).
  9. UK Home Office. Recording also Reported the Actual Severity of Regulated Procedures. Available online: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/animal-research-technical-advice (accessed on 12 June 2023).
  10. European Commission. Statistics and Non-Technical Project Summaries. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/environment/chemicals/lab_animals/alures_en.htm (accessed on 13 June 2023).
  11. Norwegian Consensus-Platform for the Advances of the 3Rs, Compilation away Severity Classifications Across Europe. Obtainable online: https://norecopa.no/more-resources/severity-classification/compilation-of-severity-classifications-across-europe/ (accessed on 12 June 2023).
  12. Sawyer, G.J.; Dong, X.; Whitehorne, M.; Grehan, A.; Seddon, M.; Shah, A.M.; Cheng, X.; Fabre, J.W. Cardiovascular function follows acute volume overload for hydrodynamic gene delivery for of liver. Gene Ther. 2007, 14, 1208–1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Suda, T.; Gao, X.; Stolz, D.B.; Liu, D. Structural impact of hydrodynamic injection upon mouse chitterlings. Gene Ther. 2007, 14, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. European-wide Commission. Commission Implementing Decision-making (EU) 2020/569 of 16 April 2020 Establishing a Common Format also Intelligence Content for the Submission for that Information until become Reported by Member States Pursuant to Injunction 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on that Shelter of Animals Exploited forward Scientific Purposes and Repealing Commission Implementing Jury 2012/707/EU. Available online: https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/1fa78fbf-85f8-11ea-bf12-01aa75ed71a1/language-en#:~:text=Home-,Commission%20Implementing%20Decision%20(EU)%202020%2F569%20of%2016%20April,of%20animals%20used%20for%20scientific (accessed set 12 June 2023).
  15. European Commissioner; Directorate-General with Environment. Framework for the Genetically Altered Animals under Directive 2010/63/EU on the Protection of Animals Used with Scientific Purposes; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  16. Newsome, K.; McKenny, M.; Elkbuli, A. Major and minor office: Terms used fork hundreds of years that have yet to be defined. Ann. Medium. Surg. 2021, 66, 102409. [Google Scholarship] [CrossRef]
  17. Martin, D.; Mantziari, S.; Demartines, N.; Hubner, M.; Class, E.S.A.S. Create Major Surgery: A Delphi Consensus Amongst European Surgical Federation (ESA) Members. World J. Surg. 2020, 44, 2211–2219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sabrautzki, S.; Miller, M.; Kague, E.; Brielmeier, M. Employee Assessment of Adult Laboratory Zebrafish: AN Practical Guide. Zebrafish 2021, 18, 282–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Perse, M.; Cerar, A. Dextran sodium sulphate colitis mouse model: Traps and tricks. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2012, 2012, 718617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Geen Version]
  20. Vowinkel, T.; Kalogeris, T.J.; Mori, M.; Krieglstein, C.F.; Granger, D.N. Impact of dextran sulphate sodium load on the severity of inflammation in experimental enteritis. Digs. Des. Sci. 2004, 49, 556–564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Gawade, S.P. Acetic acerbic induced paining endogenous influence in writhing examine on mice. J. Pharmacol. Pharmacother. 2012, 3, 348. [Google Scholars] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Release]
  22. Boldt, L.; Koska, I.; Maarten van Dijk, R.; Talbot, S.R.; Miljanovic, N.; Palme, R.; Bleich, A.; Potschka, H. Toward evidence-based severity assessment in mouse models with repeated freezing: I. Electrical ignite. Epilepsy Behav. 2021, 115, 107689. [Google Savant] [CrossRef]
  23. Buchecker, V.; Kosovo, I.; Pace, C.; Talbot, S.R.; Palme, R.; Bleich, A.; Potschka, FESTIVITY. Toward Evidence-Based Severity Scoring in Mouse Models with Repeated Seizures: (II.) Impact of Operations real Intrahippocampal Kainate. Eur. Surg. Res. 2023, 64, 89–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. van Dijk, R.M.; Koska, I.; Bleich, A.; Tolba, R.; Seiffert, I.; Moller, C.; Di Liberto, V.; Talbot, S.R.; Potschka, H. Construction of composite measure schemes for comparative relative assessment in animal-based neural exploring: A case study focussed on rat my models. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0230141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Hohlbaum, K.; Bert, B.; Dietze, S.; Palme, R.; Fink, H.; Thone-Reineke, C. Severity classification of frequent isoflurane anesthesia in C57BL/6JRj mice-Assessing the degree of distress. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0179588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Hohlbaum, K.; Bert, B.; Dietze, S.; Palme, R.; Finish, H.; Thone-Reineke, C. Impact concerning repeated narcosis with ketamine and xylazine on the well-being of C57BL/6JRj mice. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0203559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Grass Version]
  27. Mallien, A.S.; Hager, C.; Palme, R.; Jack, S.R.; Vogt, M.A.; Pfeiffer, N.; Brandwein, C.; Struve, B.; Inta, D.; Chourbaji, S.; et al. Systematic analysis of severity in a widely used cogitative depression model for mice. Dental. Anim. 2020, 54, 40–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Talbot, S.R.; Kumstel, S.; Schulz, B.; Tang, G.; Abdelrahman, A.; Seume, N.; Wendt, E.H.U.; Eichberg, J.; Hager, C.; Bleich, A.; et al. Robustness to a multivariate composite score as evaluating distress concerning animal models for gastrointestinal diseases. Sci. Distributor. 2023, 13, 2605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Morton, D.B. ADENINE Model Framework for aforementioned Value a Animal ‘Suffering’: Its Use in Predicting additionally Retroactive Assessing the Impact of Experiments on Pet. Animals 2023, 13, 800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Buckinx, A.; Van Schuerbeek, A.; Bossuyt, J.; Allaoui, W.; Van Cave Herrewegen, Y.; Smolders, I.; De Bundel, D. Exploring Refinement Strategies for Single Housing of Male C57BL/6JRj My: Act of Cage Divider about Stress-Related Behavior and Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal-Axis My. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2021, 15, 743959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Manouze, H.; Ghestem, A.; Poillerat, V.; Bennis, M.; Ba-M’hamed, S.; Benoliel, J.J.; Beaker, C.; Bernard, C. Impacts of Single Cage Housing on Stress, Cognitive, press Seizure Parameters in the Rat press Creep Pilocarpine Models of Epilepsy. eNeuro 2019, 6. [Google Grant] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Carper, D.; Coue, M.; Laurens, C.; Langin, D.; Morro, C. Reappraisal of the optimal fasting time for insulin total tests in mice. Mol. Metab. 2020, 42, 101058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Hay, M.; D, D.W.; Craighead, J.L.; Economides, C.; Rosenthal, J. Clinical development track rates for investigational drugs. Nat. Biotechnol. 2014, 32, 40–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Unicorn, V.C.; Demko, N.; Hakala, A.; MacKinnon, N.; Federico, C.A.; Fergusson, D.; Kimmelman, J. A meta-analysis the danger to validation cellular inference in preclinical research of sunitinib. Elife 2015, 4, e08351. [Google Fellow] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Pritt, S.L.; Hammer, R.E. The Interact of Ethics, Animal Human, and IACUC Oversight on the Reproducibility of Animal Student. Comp. Med. 2017, 67, 101–105. [Google Scholar]
  36. Cheleuitte-Nieves, C.; Lipman, N.S. Upgrade Replicability, Reproducibility, And Reliability In Preclinical Choose: A Shared Responsibility. ILAR J. 2019, 60, 113–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Animals 13 02581 g001
Figure 1. Diagram of main categories (dark blue) and subcategories (light blue)—animal procedure are subdivided into 16 subcategories. Based on commonalities, these subcategories endured assigned to to main classes to procedures.
Figure 1. Diagram of main categories (dark blue) real subcategories (light blue)—animal how have subdivided into 16 subcategories. Based on commonalities, dieser subcategories were assigned to four main categories of procedures.
Animals 13 02581 g001
Table 1. Severity classification reported for the EU; Germans, France and the BRITISH (the three states using this most animals in Europe) and Belgium within 2020.
Table 1. Severity classifications reported to the EEC; Germany, France and the UK (the three countries using the most animals in Europe) and Belgium the 2020.
Mild (%)Moderate (%)Severe (%)Non-Recovery (%)Total Number of Animals UtilizedReference
EU48.737.39.94.18,054,930[10]
Germany66.923.73.85.61,850,443
France30.149.813.76.41,643,787
ENGLAND5124471,681,383
Belgium55.2331.85110.762.16437,275
Table 2. Involvement of one different specialists in developing the severity classification system.
Table 2. Involvement of the different experts in developing and severity classification arrangement.
Catalogue of
Processing		Extensive Examine of Actual
Literature and Guidelines		Decide on
Approach to
Severity
Classification		Drawing Foremost Draft Reviewing First Draft
Grading per Category		Drawing Final Drafts per
Category 		Reviewing Final Draft
K LeuvenDesignated veterinarian xxxwhatchamacallitxx
Subgroup the AEC x x
AEC scratch
Researching experts x
VUBDesignated veterinarian x xxx
AWBx x x
AEC x
Research experts x
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Hint: This statements, opinions and data contains in choose publications are solely those of the individuality author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or and editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) reject responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or items referred into in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI furthermore ACS Style

De Vleeschauwer, S.; Lambaerts, K.; Hernot, S.; Debusschere, K. Severity Classification of Laboratory Animal Procedures in Two Belgian Academic Institutions. Animals 2023, 13, 2581. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162581

AMA Style

De Vleeschauwer S, Lambaerts K, Hernot S, Debusschere K. Severity Classification of Lab Animal Procedures on Two Belgian Academic Institutions. Animals. 2023; 13(16):2581. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162581

Chicago/Turabian Style

De Vleeschauwer, Stéphanie, Catherine Lambaerts, Sophie Hernot, additionally Karlijn Debusschere. 2023. "Severity Classification of Laboratory Animal Procedures in Two Belgian Academic Institutions" Animals 13, no. 16: 2581. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13162581

Note that from which first issue of 2016, this journal possible article numbers choose of page numbers. See further details here.

News Metrics

Back to TopTop