Laboratory animal strain mobilities: handling with care for animal sentience and biosecurity.
Journal
History and philosophy of the life sciences
ISSN: 1742-6316
Titre abrégé: Hist Philos Life Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 8003052
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Jun 2022
29 Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
17
09
2020
accepted:
13
05
2022
revised:
11
05
2022
entrez:
29
6
2022
pubmed:
30
6
2022
medline:
2
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The global distribution of laboratory mouse strains is valued for ensuring the continuity, validity and accessibility of model organisms. Mouse strains are therefore assumed mobile and able to travel. We draw on the concept of 'animal mobilities' (Hodgetts and Lorimer 2019) to explain how attending to laboratory mice as living animal, commodity and scientific tool is shaping how they are transported through contemporary scientific infrastructures and communities. Our paper is framed around exploring how animal strains travel, rather than animals, as we show that it is only through understanding strain mobility that we can explain how and why live animal movement can be replaced by germinal products. The research is based on qualitative fieldwork in 2018 and 2019 that included 2 weeks ethnography and interviews with key informants involved in the movement of laboratory animals. The empirical analysis discusses practices that relate to managing biosecurity and animal welfare concerns when moving laboratory animal strains. In closing we reflect more broadly on the contemporary 'ethico-onto-epistemological' (Barad, 2014) entanglement that shapes who or what travels to support laboratory science data-making practices, and the intensity of care 'tinkering' practices (Mol and Law 2010) that facilitate the movement. We explain how a laboratory animal strain exceeds its value solely as a mobile and thus exchangeable commodity, illustrated in how values that relate to animal sentience and infection-risk supports its material transformation. Consequently, it is becoming increasingly common for non-sentient germinal products - embryos and gametes - to replace live sentient animals when being moved.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35768645
doi: 10.1007/s40656-022-00510-1
pii: 10.1007/s40656-022-00510-1
pmc: PMC9242895
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
30Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 205393/Z/16/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 205393
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Abram, D. (2011). Becoming animal: an earthly cosmology (1. Vintage Books ed.). Vintage Books
Anderson, B. (2009). Affective atmospheres. Emotion Space and Society, 2(2), 77–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emospa.2009.08.005
doi: 10.1016/j.emospa.2009.08.005
Animal and Plant Health Agency (2020). Import of animals under the ‘Balai’ Council Directive 92/65/EEC.Important Information Note, (BLLV/1), 9
Arts, J., Oosterhuis, N., Kramer, K., & Ohl, F. (2014). Effects of transfer from breeding to research facility on the welfare of rats. Animals, 4(4), 712–728. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani4040712
doi: 10.3390/ani4040712
Asdal, K., Hinchliffe, S., Druglitrø, T., & Routledge (2017). Humans, animals and biopolitics: The more-than-human condition. Routledge Taylor & Francis Group
Bailey, J. (2018). Does the stress of laboratory life and experimentation on animals adversely affect research data? A critical review. Alternatives to Laboratory Animals: ATLA, 46(5), 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/026119291804600501
doi: 10.1177/026119291804600501
Barad, K. (2014). Invertebrate visions: Diffractions of the Brittlestar. https://doi.org/10.1215/9780822376989-015
Barker, K. (2010). Biosecure citizenship: Politicising symbiotic associations and the construction of biological threat. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 35(3), 350–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2010.00386.x
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-5661.2010.00386.x
Boden, T., & Hawkins, P. (2016). Communicating the culture of care – how to win friends and influence people. Animal Technology and Welfare, 15, 151–156
Bubela, T., Guebert, J., & Mishra, A. (2015). Use and misuse of material transfer agreements: Lessons in proportionality from research, repositories, and litigation. PLOS Biology, 13(2), e1002060. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002060
doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002060
Buller, H. (2012). One slash of light, then gone: Animals as movement. Études Rurales, 189, 139–153. https://doi.org/10.4000/etudesrurales.9630
doi: 10.4000/etudesrurales.9630
Choi, S. Y., Saravia-Butler, A., Shirazi-Fard, Y., Leveson-Gower, D., Stodieck, L. S., Cadena, S. M., et al. (2020). Validation of a new rodent experimental system to investigate consequences of long duration space habitation. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 2336. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58898-4
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-58898-4
Claassen, V. (1994). Neglected factors in pharmacology and neuroscience research: Biopharmaceutics, animal characteristics, maintenance, testing conditions. Elsevier
Clark, A. (2005, June 6). Backlash to animal testing flight ban rattles BA. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/jun/06/science.theairlineindustry . Accessed 16 April 2020
Clark, J. (2014). Labourers or lab tools? Rethinking the role of lab animals in clinical trials. In N. Taylor & R. Twine (Eds.), The rise of critical animal studies: From the margins to the centre, Vol. 52, (pp. 139–164). Accessed 28 January 2019
Cresswell, T. (2011a). Mobilities I: Catching up. Progress in Human Geography, 35(4), 550–558. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132510383348
doi: 10.1177/0309132510383348
Cresswell, T. (2011b). Mobilities II: Still. Progress in Human Geography. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132511423349
doi: 10.1177/0309132511423349
Cresswell, T. (2014). Mobilities III: Moving on. Progress in Human Geography, 38(5), 712–721. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132514530316
doi: 10.1177/0309132514530316
Davies, G. (2013). Mobilizing experimental life: Spaces of becoming with mutant mice. Theory Culture & Society, 30, 129–153. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276413496285
doi: 10.1177/0263276413496285
Drozdowicz, C. K., Bowman, T. A., Webb, M. L., & Lang, C. (1990). Effect of in-house transport on murine plasma corticosterone concentration and blood lymphocyte populations. American Journal of Veterinary Research, 51(11), 1841–1846
Du, Y., Xie, W., & Liu, C. (2010). Strategies and considerations for distributing and recovering mouse lines. Methods in Enzymology, 476, 37–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(10)76003-1
doi: 10.1016/S0076-6879(10)76003-1
Einhorn, D., & Heimes, R. (2009). Creating a mouse academic research commons. Nature Biotechnology, 27(10), 890–891. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt1009-890
doi: 10.1038/nbt1009-890
Enticott, G. (2016). Market instruments, biosecurity and place-based understandings of animal disease. Journal of Rural Studies, 45, 312–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.04.008
doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2016.04.008
Franklin, S. (2007). Dolly Mixtures: The remaking of genealogy. Duke University Press. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/69636 . Accessed 11 May 2022
Fray, M. D., Pickard, A. R., Harrison, M., & Cheeseman, M. T. (2008). Upgrading mouse health and welfare: Direct benefits of a large-scale rederivation programme. Laboratory Animals, 42(2), 127–139. https://doi.org/10.1258/la.2007.007005
doi: 10.1258/la.2007.007005
Giraud, E. H. (2019). What comes after entanglement? Duke University Press. https://www.dukeupress.edu/what-comes-after-entanglement . Accessed 30 March 2022
Greenhough, B., & Roe, E. (2017). Exploring the role of animal technologists in implementing the 3Rs: An ethnographic investigation of the UK university sector. Science Technology & Human Values, 0162243917718066. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917718066
Herbel, J., Aurich, J., Gautier, C., Melchert, M., & Aurich, C. (2020). Stress response of Beagle dogs to repeated short-distance road transport. Animals, 10(11), 2114. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112114
doi: 10.3390/ani10112114
Hobson-West, P., & Davies, A. (2018). Societal sentience: Constructions of the public in animal research policy and practice. Science Technology & Human Values, 43(4), 671–693. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243917736138
doi: 10.1177/0162243917736138
Hodgetts, T., & Lorimer, J. (2020). Animals’ mobilities. Progress in Human Geography, 44(1), 4–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132518817829
doi: 10.1177/0309132518817829
Home Office. (2014). Guidance on the operation of the animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. Home Office
Home Office (2019, July 18). Statistics of scientific procedures on living animals, Great Britain 2018: Data tables. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/statistics-of-scientific-procedures-on-living-animals-great-britain-2018 . Accessed 20 August 2019
Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources (Ed.) (2000). Infectious diseases of mice and rats (4th print.). National Academy Press
Jørgensen, D. (2016). Muskox in a box and other tales of containers as domesticating mediators in animal relocation. In K. Bjørkdahl, & T. Druglitrø (Eds.), Animal housing and human-animal relations: Politics, practices and infrastructures (pp. 100–114). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
Kelley, K. A. (2010). Transport of mouse lines by shipment of live embryos. Methods in enzymology, 476 vol., (pp. 25–36). Elsevier
Kenyon, J., & Fray, M. D. (2017). Sharing mutations: Are biobanks still required in the post-CRISPR/Cas9 era? Mammalian Genome, 28(7), 383–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00335-017-9710-y
doi: 10.1007/s00335-017-9710-y
Kirchhelle, C. (2021). From protest to ‘Holy Writ’: The mainstreaming of welfare politics. In C. Kirchhelle (Ed.), Bearing witness: Ruth Harrison and British farm animal welfare (1920–2000) (pp. 205–222). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62792-8_11
doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-62792-8_11
Kirk, R. G. W. (2010). A Brave new animal for a brave new world: The British laboratory animals bureau and the Constitution of international standards of laboratory animal production and use, circa 1947–1968. Isis, 101, 62–94. https://doi.org/10.1086/652689
doi: 10.1086/652689
Kirk, R. G. W. (2012). “Standardization through Mechanization”: Germ-free life and the engineering of the ideal laboratory animal. Technology and Culture, 53(1), 61–93
doi: 10.1353/tech.2012.0025
Kohler, R. E. (1994). Lords of the fly: Drosophila genetics and the experimental life. University of Chicago Press
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social an introduction to actor-network-theory. OUP
Law, J. (2006). Disaster in agriculture: Or foot and mouth mobilities. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 38(2), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1068/a37273
doi: 10.1068/a37273
Lorimer, J., Hodgetts, T., & Barua, M. (2017). Animals’ atmospheres. Progress in Human Geography. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132517731254
doi: 10.1177/0309132517731254
Mahabir, E., Bauer, B., & Schmidt, J. (2008). Rodent and germplasm trafficking: Risks of microbial contamination in a high-tech biomedical world. ILAR Journal, 49(3), 347–355. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.49.3.347
doi: 10.1093/ilar.49.3.347
McAdams, P., Olson, S., Anestidou, L., & Ogilvie, J. (2017). National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (U.S.), Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (U.S.), & National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (U.S.) (Eds.). Transportation of laboratory animals: Proceedings of a workshop. Presented at the transportation of laboratory animals (Workshop), The National Academies Press
Message, R. (2019). Animal welfare and the nation in Brexit Britain: A genealogy of care and control. Presented at the National Cultures of Care, Animals and Science. London School of Economics and Political Science
Mishra, A., Schofield, P. N., & Bubela, T. M. (2016). Sustaining large-scale infrastructure to promote pre-competitive biomedical research: Lessons from mouse genomics. New Biotechnology, 33(2), 280–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbt.2015.10.002
doi: 10.1016/j.nbt.2015.10.002
Mota, V. C., Siikavuopio, S. I., & James, P. (2021). Physiological responses to live air transport of red king crab (Paralithodes camtschaticus). Fisheries Research, 237, 105882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2021.105882
doi: 10.1016/j.fishres.2021.105882
National Research Council. (2006). Guidelines for the humane transportation of research animals. National Academies Press
Nelson, N. C. (2018). Model behavior: Animal experiments, complexity, and the genetics of psychiatric disorders. University of Chicago Press
Obernier, J. A., & Baldwin, R. L. (2006). Establishing an appropriate period of acclimatization following transportation of laboratory animals. ILAR journal, 47(4), 364–369
doi: 10.1093/ilar.47.4.364
Pain, E. (2016, November 28). Spanish military flies lab animals to Canary Islands after airlines refuse to take them on board. Science. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/11/spanish-military-flies-lab-animals-canary-islands-after-airlines-refuse-take-them-board . Accessed 16 April 2020
Parry, B. (2004). Trading the genome: Investigating the commodification of bio-information. Columbia University Press
Parry, B. (2019). Patents and the challenge of ‘open source’ in an emergent biological commons or … the strange case of Betty Crocker and the mouse. BioSocieties. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41292-019-00158-4
Rader, K. A. (2004). Making mice: Standardizing animals for American biomedical research, 1900–1955. Princeton University Press
doi: 10.1515/9780691187587
Radin, J., & Kowal, E. (2017). Introduction: The politics of low temperature. Cryopolitics: Frozen life in a melting world. The MIT Press
doi: 10.7551/mitpress/10456.001.0001
Robinson, V., Morton, D. B., Anderson, D., Carver, J. F. A., Francis, R. J., Hubrecht, R., et al. (2003). Refinement and reduction in production of genetically modified mice. Laboratory Animals, 37(1_suppl), 1–1. https://doi.org/10.1258/002367703766452723
doi: 10.1258/002367703766452723
RSPCA Resource Sharing Working Group (2009). Sharing and archiving genetically altered mice: Opportunities for reduction and refinement. RSPCA. Accessed 16 October 2017
Rumpel, S., Scholl, C., Göbel, A., Palme, R., & Mahabir, E. (2019). Effect of ground transportation on adrenocortical activity in prepuberal female mice from five different genetic backgrounds. Animals: An Open Access Journal from MDPI, 9(5), https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9050239
Swallow, J., Anderson, D., Buckwell, A. C., Harris, T., Hawkins, P., Kirkwood, J., et al. (2005). Guidance on the transport of laboratory animals. Laboratory Animals, 39(1), 1–39. https://doi.org/10.1258/0023677052886493
doi: 10.1258/0023677052886493
Tsing, A. L. (2015). The mushroom at the end of the world: On the possibility of life in capitalist ruins. Princeton University Press
doi: 10.2307/j.ctvc77bcc
Willis, R. S., Fleming, P. A., Dunston-Clarke, E. J., Barnes, A. L., Miller, D. W., & Collins, T. (2021). Animal welfare indicators for sheep during sea transport: Monitoring health and behaviour. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 240, 105354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105354
doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105354
Woods, A. (2012). The history of veterinary ethics in Britain, ca.1870–2000. Veterinary & Animal Ethics (pp. 3–18). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118384282.ch1