agguide_4th.pdf

Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching Fourth edition  © 2020. Published by the American Dairy Science Association®, the American Society of Animal Science, and the Poultry Science Association. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons...

Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching Fourth edition  © 2020. Published by the American Dairy Science Association®, the American Society of Animal Science, and the Poultry Science Association. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons. org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). American Dairy Science Association® American Society of Animal Science Poultry Science Association 1800 South Oak Street, Suite 100 PO Box 7410 4114C Fieldstone Road Champaign, IL 61820 Champaign, IL 61826 Champaign, IL 61822 www.adsa.org www.asas.org www.poultryscience.org ISBN: 978-0-9634491-5-3 (PDF) ISBN: 978-1-7362930-0-3 (PDF) ISBN: 978-0-9649811-2-6 (PDF) 978-0-9634491-4-6 (ePub) 978-1-7362930-1-0 (ePub) 978-0-9649811-3-3 (ePub)  Committees to revise the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching, 4th edition (2020) Senior Editorial Committee Cassandra B. Tucker, University of California Davis (representing the American Dairy Science Association®) Michael D. MacNeil, Delta G (representing the American Society of Animal Science) A. Bruce Webster, University of Georgia (representing the Poultry Science Association) Ag Guide 4th edition authors Chapter 1: Institutional Policies Chapter 7: Dairy Cattle Ken Anderson, North Carolina State University, Chair Cassandra Tucker, University of California Davis, Chair Deana Jones, ARS USDA Nigel Cook, University of Wisconsin–Madison Gretchen Hill, Michigan State University Marina von Keyserlingk, University of British Columbia James Murray, University of California Davis Peter Krawczel, University of Tennessee Chapter 2: Agricultural Animal Health Care Chapter 8: Horses Frank F. Bartol, Auburn University, Chair Sarah A. Reed, University of Connecticut Johann Coetzee, Kansas State University Donald C. Lay Jr., ARS USDA Cia Johnson, American Veterinary Medical Association Timothy B. Lescun, Purdue University Wendy Underwood, American Veterinary Medical Association Chapter 9: Swine Michael Martin, North Carolina Department of Agriculture Gretchen Hill, Michigan State University and Consumer Services Donald C. Lay Jr., ARS USDA Scott Radcliffe, Purdue University Chapter 3: Husbandry, Housing, and Biosecurity Brian Richert, Purdue University Darrin Karcher, Purdue University, Chair Marcia Endres, University of Minnesota Chapter 10: Sheep and Goats Rick Grant, William H. Miner Agricultural Research Michael L. Thonney, Cornell University Institute Daniel F. Waldron, Texas A&M University (retired) Frank Mitloehner, University of California Davis Gosia Zobel, AgResearch, New Zealand Mark Estienne, Virginia Polytechnic Institute Michael D. MacNeil, Delta G & State University Ken Koelkebeck, University of Illinois Poultry Science Association Editorial Committee (poultry species chapters) Chapter 4: Environmental Enrichment A. Bruce Webster, University of Georgia Janeen Salak-Johnson, Oklahoma State University, Chair Ken Anderson, North Carolina State University Donald C. Lay Jr., ARS USDA Karen Christensen, Tyson Foods Kathryn Proudfoot, The Ohio State University Ken Koelkebeck, University of Illinois Emily Miller-Cushon, University of Florida Maja Makagon, University of California Davis Chapter 11: Meat-Type Poultry Marisa Erasmus, Purdue University Colin Scanes, University of Arkansas, Chair Kate Barger-Weathers, Cobb-Vantress Inc. Chapter 5: Animal Handling and Transport Dave Hermes, Purdue University Temple Grandin, Colorado State University, Chair Bill Dozier, Auburn University Casey W. Ritz, University of Georgia Karen Christensen, Tyson Foods Inc. Derek Haley, University of Guelph Anne-Marie Neeteson, Aviagen Inc. Yi Liang, University of Arkansas Aaron Kiess, Mississippi State University Chapter 6: Beef Cattle Joel S. Caton, North Dakota State University Michael Galyean, Texas Tech University Ron Lemenager, Purdue University Greg Lardy, North Dakota State University Michael Looper, University of Arkansas Clinton Krehbiel, University of Nebraska Continued Steven Zinn, University of Connecticut Chapter 12: Egg-Type Poultry Chapter 13: Waterfowl Ken Koelkebeck, University of Illinois, Chair Greg Fraley, Purdue University, Chair Ken Anderson, North Carolina State University Mike Lilburn, The Ohio State University Karen Schwean-Lardner, University of Saskatchewan Mamduh Sifri, Sifri Solutions LLC Craig Coufal, Texas A&M University Xixi Chen, Maple Leaf Farms Inc. Janice Siegford, Michigan State University Darrin Karcher, Purdue University A. Bruce Webster, University of Georgia Maja Makagon, University of California Davis Heng-wei Cheng, ARS USDA/Purdue University Pat Wakenell, Purdue University Susan Fraley, Purdue University  Committees to revise the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching, 3rd edition (2010) Writing Committee John McGlone, PhD, Co-Chair Janice Swanson, PhD, Co-Chair Steven Ford, PhD Wendy Underwood, DVM Frank Mitloehner, PhD Joy Mench, PhD Temple Grandin, PhD Terry Mader, PhD Pamela Ruegg, DVM Susan Eicher, PhD Carolyn Stull, PhD Patricia Hester, PhD Gregory Lewis, PhD Janeen Salak-Johnson, PhD Michael Galyean, PhD, Liaison to the FASS Board Subcommittees Institutional Policies Dairy Cattle Stephen Ford, PhD, Chair Pamela Ruegg, DVM, and Susan Eicher, PhD, Co-Chairs James Swearengen, DVM Bill Bickert, PhD Don Lay, PhD Randy Shaver, PhD W. Ronald Butler, PhD Nigel Cook, BS, MRCVS Frank Bartol, PhD Paul Fricke, PhD Sheila McGuirk, PhD, DVM Agricultural Animal Health Care Doug Reinemann, PhD Wendy Underwood, DVM, Chair Michele Bailey, DVM Horses Steven Berry, DVM Carolyn Stull, PhD, Chair Gail Golab, PhD, DVM Anne Rodiek, PhD Robert Coleman, PhD Husbandry, Housing, and Biosecurity Sarah Ralston, VMD, PhD Frank Mitloehner, PhD, Chair Donald Topliff, PhD James Swearengen, DVM Suzanne Millman, PhD Curt Gooch, PE Pius Mwangi Ndewga, PhD Poultry Larry Jacobson, PhD Patricia Hester, PhD, Chair Ken Anderson, PhD Environmental Enrichment Inma Estevez, PhD Joy Mench, PhD, Chair Ken Koelkebeck, PhD Ruth Newberry, PhD Sally Noll, PhD Suzanne Millman, PhD Robert Porter, PhD, DVM Cassandra Tucker, PhD Carl Mike Turk, BS Larry Katz, PhD Bruce Webster, PhD Animal Handling and Transport Sheep and Goats Temple Grandin, PhD, Chair Gregory Lewis, PhD, Chair Joseph Stookey, PhD William Gavin, DVM Mhairi Sutherland, PhD Arthur L. Goetsch, PhD A. Bruce Webster, PhD J. Bret Taylor, PhD Carolyn Stull, PhD Michael Thonney, PhD Jeffrey Hill, PhD Swine Beef Cattle Janeen Salak-Johnson, PhD, Chair Terry Mader, PhD, Chair Joe Cassady, PhD Allen Trenkle, PhD Matthew B. Wheeler, PhD James W. Oltjen, PhD Anna Johnson, PhD Tami Brown-Brandl, PhD John Arthington, PhD Larry Hollis, DVM Scott Willard, PhD  Committees to revise the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching, 1st revised edition (1999) Stanley Curtis, FASFAS liaison to the steering and development committee Guide Revision Committee Joy A. Mench, Chair Margaret E. Benson James V. Craig Katherine A. Houpt John J. McGlone Jack L. Albright Leslie L. Christianson Adele P. Douglass William G. Kvasnicka Neal R. Merchen Subcommittees Beef Horses Sheep and Goats Neal R. Merchen, Chair Katherine A. Houpt, Chair Margaret E. Benson, Chair G. LeRoy Hahn Harold F. Hintz Frank C. Hinds William G. Kvasnicka Sandi Lieb Carl S. Menzies Michael L. Galyean James A. DeShazer Cindy B. Wolf David P. Hutcheson K. Douglas Butler Dexter W. Johnson Janice C. Swanson Stephen G. Jackson Larry S. Katz Thomas Tobin Christine S. F. Williams Dairy Cattle and Veal Jack L. Albright, Chair Poultry Swine Ruth Blauwiekel James V. Craig, Chair John J. McGlone, Chair Kenneth E. Olson Gerald B. Haventsein J. Joe Ford William G. Bickert Karl E. Nestor Paul L. Sundberg James L. Morrill Jr. Paul B. Siegel Leslie L. Christianson Carolyn L. Stull William F. Dean E. T. Kornegay Kenneth K. Kruger Lisa Tokach Graham H. Purchase Garrett L. Van Wicklen  Committees for the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Agricultural Research and Teaching, 1st edition (1988) Steering Committee Joy A. Mench, Chair Alden Booren Glenn Gray Kirklyn Kerr David L. Zartman Jack L. Albright Leslie L. Christianson Virgil Hays Alvin Melliere Guide Development Committee Stanley E. Curtis, Chair Jack L. Albright Harold W. Gonyou John J. McGlone James V. Craig Katherine A. Houpt W. Ray Stricklin  Table of Contents PREFACE x CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 1 CHAPTER 2: AGRICULTURAL ANIMAL HEALTH CARE 9 CHAPTER 3: HUSBANDRY, HOUSING, AND BIOSECURITY 17 CHAPTER 4: ENVIRONMENTAL ENRICHMENT 30 CHAPTER 5: ANIMAL HANDLING AND TRANSPORT 54 CHAPTER 6: BEEF CATTLE 76 CHAPTER 7: DAIRY CATTLE 92 CHAPTER 8: HORSES 113 CHAPTER 9: SWINE 127 CHAPTER 10: DOMESTIC SHEEP AND GOATS 141 CHAPTER 11: MEAT-TYPE POULTRY 156 CHAPTER 12: EGG-TYPE POULTRY 177 CHAPTER 13: WATERFOWL 199 APPENDIX I U.S. Government Principles for the Utilization and Care of Vertebrate Animals Used in Testing, Research, and Training 208 INDEX 209 viii ix  PREFACE This is the fourth edition of the Guide for the Care the Ag Guide. All chapters were updated, revised, and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and or rewritten, with the extent of revision of any given Teaching, commonly known as the Ag Guide. This chapter determined by progress in the academic lit- edition builds upon and replaces previous versions erature pertaining to subjects covered in the chapter. of the Ag Guide published in 1988, 1999, and 2010. Three new poultry chapters were written, covering The Ag Guide is published jointly by the American meat-type poultry, egg-type poultry, and waterfowl Dairy Science Association (ADSA), the American to reflect the diversity of species, phenotypes, and Society of Animal Science (ASAS), and the Poultry uses among avian agricultural animals, replacing the Science Association (PSA). The Ag Guide comprises single chapter on poultry in the third edition of the subject-oriented chapters covering subjects that per- Ag Guide. tain to all the agricultural animal species (chapters 1 The board-approved first draft of the Ag Guide was to 5) and species chapters, which fall under the pur- made available to the membership of ADSA, ASAS, view of the respective association(s) dedicated to the and PSA, institutional animal care and use commit- species (chapters 6 to 13). Each association appoint- tees (IACUCs), and other users of the Ag Guide, and ed a senior editor to steer the revision of their respec- to the public for a 75-day period of comment. After tive species chapters and to collaborate with the se- all submitted comments had been considered, the nior editors from the other associations to guide the 4th edition of the Ag Guide was produced and made writing and revision of the subject-oriented chapters. available on the ADSA, ASAS, and PSA websites. Committees charged with the writing and revi- The Ag Guide covers agricultural animal species sion of the species-specific chapters were recruited having different phenotypes within species and that by the respective professional associations devoted are housed in assorted management systems across to the species. In addition, up to two individuals widely varying climates. The content must be suf- identified by each association were selected for each ficiently broad to cover the diverse research and of the subject-oriented chapter committees, which teaching institutions that use agricultural animals, thus comprised representatives from the three as- yet be clear enough to give unambiguous guidance sociations. The individuals recruited were scientists, to IACUCs responsible for the care and use of ani- veterinarians, or engineers with expertise in the spe- mals in their respective institutions. The terms must, cies or subjects covered in their respective chapters. should, and recommend, which were introduced in the Each chapter committee selected a chairperson from third edition of the Ag Guide, have been clarified its membership to coordinate revisions and interact in this edition to mean the following when used in with the senior editors. reference to a specific animal care and use practice: The chapter committees searched the scientific lit- Must indicates that the animal care and use must be erature to include new research published since the as stated; should indicates that the animal care and third edition of the Ag Guide. The Ag Guide senior use ought to be as indicated unless otherwise justi- editors reviewed the chapters before accepting final fied; recommend indicates an appropriate way of do- drafts. Each society was responsible for the peer re- ing things but leaves room for other approaches that view of the respective species-specific chapters, with achieve the same result. reviewers drawn from peers and the society boards The Ag Guide is not intended to be simply a set of directors. The boards of directors of each asso- of provisions on how agricultural animals are to be ciation reviewed and approved final drafts of the housed and managed. Although many of the spe- general chapters, as well as their respective species cies chapters have standards for such things as floor chapters. After these approvals, the chapters were space, feeder space, and drinker allocations because compiled into the first draft of the fourth edition of these metrics have been verified by scientific study x  PREFACE xi and long practice, other animal care practices do tion and Care of Vertebrate Animals Used in Testing, not lend themselves to prescriptive stipulation. It is Research, and Training (1985; Appendix 1) are en- essential that IACUCs and others who oversee ani- dorsed in this guide as a basis for professional judg- mal care practices exercise professional judgment to ments about the appropriate treatment and use of ag- encourage appropriate animal welfare outcomes to ricultural animals in research and teaching activities. be achieved, rather than merely seeking to apply specific housing and management requirements. An Senior Editors: overly prescriptive approach to animal care and use Cassandra B. Tucker (ADSA); can stifle research progress and teaching opportuni- Michael D. MacNeil (ASAS); ties. The US Government Principles for the Utiliza- A. Bruce Webster (PSA) Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES The Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Ani- 2002; CIOMS-ICLAS, 2012). This chapter is intended mals in Research and Teaching (the Ag Guide) strongly to guide the development of institutional policies and affirms that scientific and professional judgment and programs for agricultural animal care and use. concern for the humane treatment of animals are re- quired for the proper care of animals used in research and teaching. Scientists, veterinarians, and others must MONITORING THE CARE AND USE assume responsibility for animal welfare and uphold OF AGRICULTURAL ANIMALS the rigor and integrity of agricultural animal research and instruction. The use of animals for research and Each institution should establish an agricultural ani- teaching, including production research, is governed by mal care and use program with clearly designated lines numerous federal and local laws, regulations, and stan- of authority in accordance with this guide and in com- dards. In the United States, the Animal Welfare Act pliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws, (AWA, 1990) and Title 9 Part 1A of the Code of Federal regulations, and policies. The chief executive officer, in- Regulations (USDA, 1985) apply, whereas in Europe, stitutional official, or responsible administrative official the European Convention for the Protection of Verte- of the institution should appoint a committee (known brate Animals used for Experimental and Other Scien- as the institutional animal care and use committee or tific Purposes (ETS123; Council of Europe, 1986) and IACUC) to monitor the care and use of agricultural subsequent amendments apply (Directive 2010/63/EU; animals in agricultural research and teaching activities European Union, 2010). A repository of international within the institution. The IACUC should be composed animal research regulations is available (AAALAC, of individuals who are qualified by experience or train- 2018). Compliance with these laws, regulations, poli- ing to evaluate the programs and proposals for agricul- cies, and standards (or subsequent revised versions) tural animal research and should include individuals in the establishment and implementation of an animal from each of the following categories: care program must be met. Other countries have also developed laws and guidelines for the use of animals in a scientist who has experience in agricultural re- research, with many continuing to evolve (Odgen et al., search or teaching involving agricultural animals; 2016). Because a variety of management systems and an animal, dairy, or poultry scientist who has physical accommodations may be used for agricultural training and experience in the management of ag- animals, an understanding of the husbandry needs of ricultural animals; each species and of the particular requirements of agri- a veterinarian who has training and experience in cultural research and teaching is essential for an effec- agricultural animal medicine and who is licensed tive institutional program of agricultural animal care or eligible to be licensed to practice veterinary and use (Stricklin and Mench, 1994; Granstrom, 2003). medicine; Critical components of such a program should include a person whose primary concerns are in an area (1) clearly established lines of authority and respon- outside of science (e.g., a faculty member from a sibility; (2) an active and knowledgeable institutional non-science department, a staff member, a stu- animal care and use committee (IACUC); (3) proce- dent, or an institutional administrator); dures for self-monitoring of the IACUC through regu- a person who is not affiliated with the institution lar (e.g., semi-annual) review of programs and facility and who is not a family member of an individual oversight by the institutional officer; (4) appropriately affiliated with the institution (e.g., a member of maintained facilities for proper management, hous- the clergy or a community member). This public ing, and support of animals; (5) an adequate program member is intended to provide representation for of veterinary care; and (6) training and occupational general community interests in the proper care health programs for individuals who work with the and treatment of animals and should not be a per- animals (Curtis, 1994; Tillman, 1994; ARENA-OLAW, son who uses animals in agricultural or biomedical 1  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 2 research or teaching activities at the institution; tor the humane and appropriate use of animals and in agricultural research and teaching, as well as other members as required by institutional needs any other aspect of the agricultural animal care and applicable laws, regulations, policies, and program; and granting or research funding agencies or groups. perform other functions that may be required by institutional need and by applicable laws, regula- Because of experience and training, one individual may tions, and policies. be able to fulfill more than a single role on the IACUC, but the committee should not have fewer than 5 mem- Other useful information about IACUC functions bers. This committee may also monitor the care and and training can be found in Prentice et al. (1992), the use of laboratory animals at the institution, provided Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee Guide- that the special membership requirements outlined book (ARENA-OLAW, 2002), the Public Health Service above are met. This recommendation can be fulfilled Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals by several different types of committee structures, in- (NIH, 2015), Animal Welfare Act information reposi- cluding a single institutional committee or unit com- tory (USDA, 2018), Oki et al. (1996), Silverman et al. mittees (e.g., departmental, college, or program) that (2006), and Greene et al. (2007). review agricultural and biomedical research that uses agricultural animals. The overriding goal should be to PROTOCOL REVIEW facilitate a centralized, uniform, and high-quality over- sight of the institution’s animal care program. The review of research and teaching activities using The IACUC should meet at regular intervals to en- animals is one of the most important functions of the sure that the use of agricultural animals in research and IACUC. Animal use protocol(s) (AUP) describing these teaching programs is humane, appropriate, and in ac- activities must be reviewed before the initiation of the cordance with this guide. Meetings of the IACUC need research or teaching activity to determine whether the not always be conducted in person. Electronic tech- proposed care and use of animals is appropriate and hu- nology, including web-based or telecommunications, mane. Approval of the AUP may be granted, withheld can allow the committee to function appropriately. pending modifications, or denied. The IACUC should Such communications must be held with a quorum of perform an annual review and renewal of approved members in real time and provide the same interactive AUP with resubmission and re-approval at least once opportunities as a face-to-face meeting. The IACUC every 3 years. The IACUC may choose to re-review an should work with investigators to resolve issues while AUP at any time as deemed necessary. The following ensuring animal care, taking into account the investiga- topics should be considered in the preparation and re- tors’ expertise with a particular species. The IACUC is view of animal care protocols: authorized to Objectives and significance of the research or review and approve or disapprove protocols and teaching activity. other proposed activities, or propose significant Unnecessary duplication of previous studies. changes in activities, related to agricultural ani- Availability or appropriateness of alternative pro- mal care and use in research and teaching; cedures or models (e.g., less invasive procedures, conduct, at minimum, semi-annual inspection of cell or tissue culture, or computer simulations) active agricultural animal facilities and study ar- for the proposed research or teaching activity. It eas, review the overall agricultural animal care should be noted, however, that hands-on training and use program, and provide a written report to involving animals is an important component of the responsible institutional official regarding the agricultural research and teaching (Vemulapalli et institution’s compliance with this guide (including al., 2017); additionally, there is no substitute of expected dates of correction for detected issues another animal or simulation for production re- and minority views of the IACUC, should they search. occur); Aspects of the proposed experiment or demon- investigate reports of noncompliance or animal stration having to do directly with animal care care concerns involving agricultural animals at and use, including justification for the species and the facility; strain of animal used; justification for the number suspend activities involving agricultural animals of animals used; description of procedures that when not in compliance with approved proto- may cause discomfort, distress, or pain; and meth- cols or written operating procedures (see section: ods of alleviating discomfort, distress, or pain in- Written Operating Procedures); cluding anesthesia, analgesia, tranquilizers, and make recommendations regarding the develop- nonpharmacologic means, as well as justification ment and implementation of institutional policies for any procedures that involve unalleviated pain, and procedures to facilitate, support, and moni- discomfort, or distress. Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 3 Appropriateness of procedures and post-procedur- research and teaching may require the use of produc- al care. tion practices that are consistent with those currently Criteria and process for timely intervention, re- in use in the appropriate industry, even though such moval of animals from a study, or euthanasia if practices differ from those outlined in this guide. Also, painful and stressful outcomes are anticipated research and teaching dealing with infectious diseases, (endpoint criteria). toxins, or products of biotechnology may require spe- Unusual husbandry requirements (Note: describ- cial facilities. Exceptions to this guide should be stated ing a procedure as a “standard farm operating explicitly in the AUP and be reviewed and approved by practice” may be acceptable if the institution’s the IACUC. written operating procedure is being used or if the practice is needed to serve as an appropriate control). WRITTEN OPERATING PROCEDURES Aspects of animal husbandry not covered under It is important to develop written animal care and written operating procedures (see section on Writ- husbandry policies and procedures for each unit in the ten Operating Procedures). program. Some husbandry practices may cause tempo- Method of euthanasia and disposition of the ani- rary discomfort or pain. The IACUC must review and mal. approve all operating procedures that have the poten- Responsibilities, training, and qualifications of the tial to cause pain or distress in animal care and hus- researchers, teachers, students, and animal care bandry. These procedures would then be available for personnel involved in the proposed activities. reference in the AUP without having to be described separately for each study, experiment, or demonstra- The US Government Principles for the Utilization and tion. To be acceptable as written operating procedures, Care of Vertebrate Animals Used in Testing, Research, the procedures should sustain the long-term welfare of and Training (Appendix 1 of this guide) state that the animal and the animal handlers, be performed by “Procedures involving animals should be designed and or under the direct supervision of proficient person- performed with due consideration of their relevance to nel, and be conducted with precautions taken to re- human or animal health, the advancement of knowl- duce pain, stress, and infection. The written procedures edge, or the good of society” (Vemulapalli et al., 2017). must be filed in the appropriate administrative office Because IACUCs are NOT constituted to function as and in locations accessible to individuals involved in scientific peer-review committees, the IACUC should carrying out these procedures. be judicious in reviewing the merit of proposed research Husbandry procedures and production methods at and teaching activities (Mann and Prentice, 2004). In- agricultural research facilities should be revised as stitutions should consider developing other mechanisms changes occur in the industry and when research dem- for peer merit review of research projects that have not onstrates improvements. already been reviewed by outside agencies. Although qualified peer review of research and teaching is impor- tant to consider, such peer review does not eliminate ANIMAL HEALTH CARE the need for the IACUC to thoughtfully review animal use. Adequate health care and records must be main- Institutions must develop policies for animal care and tained for all agricultural animals used in research and use related to research conducted off site as well as teaching (see Chapter 2: Agricultural Animal Health research using privately owned animals on and off site. Care). Institutional requirements will determine wheth- The fact that research is conducted off site does not er full-time, part-time, or consulting veterinary services lessen the responsibility of the institution to assure ap- are appropriate. All euthanasia methods utilized should propriate and humane animal care and use. follow American Veterinary Medical Association guide- Investigators are encouraged to work with IACUCs lines (AVMA, 2020) or be thoroughly considered by the for assistance in refining their protocols and proposed IACUC before granting approval to ensure the animal animal care and use practices. incurs no undue pain or stress. The common acceptance and use in animal agricul- ture of a production system, management practice, or BIOSECURITY routine procedure does not reduce the responsibility of every animal user to follow applicable laws, regula- It is essential that the agricultural animal care staff, tions, and policies, including the standards outlined in researchers, students, and other associated individuals this guide. Exceptions to some provisions in this guide, maintain a high standard of biosecurity to protect the however, may be justifiable to obtain new knowledge or animals from pathogenic organisms. For additional de- to demonstrate methods commonly used in commercial tails on biosecurity issues, see Chapter 3: Husbandry, agricultural animal production. For example, applied Housing, and Biosecurity. Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 4 PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS eral, state, and local regulations and will depend on the facilities, research activities, and hazards involved. The It is the responsibility of the institution to ensure degree of participation by individuals in the program that scientists, agricultural animal care staff, students, should be based on an assessment of risk by health and and other individuals who care for or use agricultural safety specialists involving consideration of the hazards animals are qualified to do so through training or ex- posed by the animals and materials used; the duration, perience. Appropriate supervision should be provided frequency, and intensity of exposure; the susceptibility with training programs appropriate for animal user of the personnel; and the history of occupational injury needs and information about the humane care and use and illness in the particular workplace (Clark, 1993; of agricultural animals, including, if applicable, (1) Kerst, 2003; Wald and Stave, 2003). husbandry needs, proper handling, surgical procedures, General guidelines for occupational health programs and pre- and post-procedural care; (2) methods to min- have been published by the National Research Coun- imize the number of animals used and techniques to cil (NRC, 2011). The program for individuals working minimize pain and distress, including the proper use with agricultural animals may include a physical exam- of anesthetics, analgesics, tranquilizers, and nonphar- ination before job placement, periodic medical evalua- macologic methods; (3) methods for reporting deficien- tions for people in identified job categories, assessments cies in the animal care program; (4) use of information of the workspaces to ensure protection from health haz- services such as the Animal Welfare Information Cen- ards, and provision for treating illness or injury. The ter at the National Agricultural Library (NRC, 1991; program should also include an educational component USDA-APHIS, 2018); and (5) methods of euthanasia. to teach personnel about agricultural animal and zoo- Records of participation in training programs should be notic disease, physical hazards, and personal hygiene. maintained and available for review as needed. Special precautions may be necessary for individuals Employees who provide routine animal care should who are at unusual risk (e.g., immunocompromised, participate regularly in in-service education and train- having a temporary or long-term physical limitation, or ing relevant to their responsibilities. Formal or on-the- pregnant). Additional training may be necessary if cer- job training opportunities should be made available to tain chemicals, radiation, and other hazardous agents all technical and husbandry support staff, including are part of an experimental protocol. those who are temporary or part-time employees. It It is important that all researchers, students, agri- is recommended that the training program include in- cultural animal caretakers, and others be immunized formation provided by experts from a broad range of against tetanus every 10 years based on the institu- disciplines such as animal husbandry, behavior, nutri- tion’s risk assessment. Prophylactic vaccinations should tion, environmental physiology, experimental surgery, also be considered when research is being conducted veterinary clinical and diagnostic medicine, agricultural on infectious diseases for which effective vaccines are engineering, instrumentation, and others as deemed ap- available. Persons working with animals may develop propriate. A variety of reference materials is available allergies. The occupational safety and health program for use in training programs (Kreger, 1995; Underwood, should identify high-risk areas with a potential for al- 2005). lergy development. Persons with known allergies should In addition to having in-house training, it is desir- be provided personal protective equipment (PPE) to able for agricultural animal care staff to be profession- reduce or eliminate allergen exposure or avoid expo- ally trained or certified. Many states have colleges with sure to animals. Physical injuries constitute health haz- accredited programs in veterinary technology (AVMA, ards for individuals working with animals. Institutions 2007). Technician and technologist certification is avail- should identify high-risk areas and tasks and should ed- able through the American Association for Laboratory ucate animal care personnel about methods for reduc- Animal Science (AALAS; https://www.aalas.org/), ing risk. Injuries can be minimized by providing train- although that program primarily emphasizes the care ing in proper animal handling, lifting, and equipment and use of laboratory animals rather than agricultural use. Access to first aid and medical treatment should animals. Animal scientists with educational credentials be readily available, and personnel should be trained ranging from the baccalaureate to the doctorate degree and familiar with access procedures. Such access may who seek recognition of their expertise in the biology include readily available and properly stocked first aid and production of agricultural animals can be certi- kits. Cases of animal bites and scratches should be fied through examination by the American Registry of documented and appropriate medical care provided as Professional Animal Scientists (ARPAS; https://www. needed. Air quality assessments are recommended for arpas.org/). animal care areas, and appropriate respiratory protec- tion should be provided for these individuals (OSHA, OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 2011). Caretakers working with agricultural animals in closed buildings should be afforded the option to use An occupational health and safety program must be respirators or dust masks because they may develop established for individuals who work with agricultural respiratory problems, including chronic and irreversible animals. The program should be consistent with fed- lung damage (Kirkhorn and Garry, 2000). Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 5 Zoonoses can also be a serious risk. Personnel (in- search involving genetically engineered (GE) and gene cluding animal care staff, technicians, investigators, edited (GEd) animals do not differ materially from clinicians, students, maintenance workers, and securi- those that apply to conventional animals used in re- ty staff) who have contact with or an opportunity for search except under special conditions. The published contact with animals, their waste products, or tissues scientific literature has not established the need for should be made aware of identified hazards (Acha and unique guidelines. The general standards of care associ- Szyfres, 2001, 2003; Fontes, 2008). Zoonotic disease in ated with GE or GEd agricultural animals should be animal populations should be screened for or monitored the same as those applied to all agricultural animals in regularly as appropriate. Information pertaining to the research unless the genetic modification requires altera- most common zoonotic diseases found in agricultural tion in management or environment to maintain animal animals and the means by which they are spread can be welfare (Dennis, 2002). Clones of livestock animals that found in the Merck Veterinary Manual (https://www. are not GE or GEd do not differ materially from non- merckvetmanual.com/). clones and require no special considerations (Batchel- The noise level in some animal facilities may be high. der et al., 2007). When personnel are exposed to noise exceeding local, The animal biotechnology industry has guidelines state, or federal standards, appropriate protection pro- for research and development with GE animals as a grams must be implemented (USDL OSHA, 1995). stewardship program (BIO, 2009). The BIO Guidance Work assignments and health records should be a part provides information for the development and imple- of an occupational health program. Occupational health mentation of stewardship programs for all institutions program records are maintained under HIPAA guidelines and researchers that plan to engage in research and de- and requirements. Records should be kept of individual velopment, and possible commercialization, of GE ani- work assignments and should include the date and time mals. The European Food Safety Authority (2012) has of injuries or unusual illnesses. Supervisors must inform published an update on the welfare and environmental personnel of potential health hazards, and personnel impact of food animals derived from cloning. must notify their supervisor if a zoonosis occurs. Research Involving Genetic Engineering SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS and Gene Editing of Agricultural Animals Hazardous Materials Genetic engineering of agricultural animals is the direct manipulation of an organism’s genes, includ- The use of hazardous biological, chemical, or physical ing heritable and nonheritable recombinant DNA materials necessitates compliance with applicable laws constructs. Gene editing is the use of programmable and regulations, as well as compliance with guidelines nucleases such as TALENs (transcription activator- issued by granting agencies and organizations. Insti- like effector nucleases) or the CRISPR/Cas 9 system tutions should have written policies governing experi- that allows for the specific site-directed induction of a mentation with hazardous materials and should ensure double-stranded DNA break, which can result in a tar- that staff members associated with research projects geted mutation (GEd) or insertion of a transgene (GE) involving hazardous materials are qualified to assess (Petersen, 2018). Genetic engineering is different from the dangers to animals and humans and are capable of traditional breeding, in which the organism’s genes are selecting appropriate safeguards. Special facilities and manipulated indirectly. The genetic engineering of ag- equipment may be required for certain hazardous ma- ricultural animals has been extensively reviewed (NRC, terials, and additional requirements exist for those bio- 2002; CAST, 2003, 2007, 2009; Wheeler, 2007; Laible, logical materials or toxins deemed as select agents by 2009; Kues and Niemann, 2011; Tan et al., 2012; Mur- federal law. Further information about recommended ray and Maga, 2016), with the recent book by Nie- practices and procedures can be found in publications mann and Wrenzycki (2018) being a useful reference. by CDC-NIH (2000, 2007), CDC-FSAP (2005), and For animals used in biomedical research, the needs for NRC (2011). thermal comfort, humidity control, floor space, and ap- propriate nutrition and husbandry practices should be Genetically Engineered, Gene Edited, based on the standards outlined in this guide. Animals and Cloned Animals with certain genetic backgrounds may have special re- quirements that should be researched and documented As advancements in research drive the discovery and to enable those responsible for animal care to be able development of new technologies, consideration needs to provide for the animals’ comfort. Animal welfare to be made for the care and use of agricultural animals for GE animals used in research is regulated by law in in research and teaching. Institutions, researchers, and some jurisdictions, with regulations and guidelines es- IACUCs should assure that assessment of animal care tablished, for example, by the US Department of Agri- and use protocols reflects differences in animal tech- culture (USDA), the US Food and Drug Administration nologies (Dennis, 2000; Wells, 2005). Guidelines for re- (FDA), and the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 6 in the United States, and, by the European Parliament Care and Use Committee Guidebook. Department of Health in Europe. Specific information for US institutions can and Human Services, Washington, DC. https://grants.nih.gov/ grants/olaw/guidebook.pdf. be obtained by reviewing the NIH guidelines for re- AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association). 2007. Veteri- search involving recombinant DNA molecules (NIH, nary technician information available online. Page iii in 2007 2002), the Animal Welfare Act regulations overseen by AVMA Membership Directory and Resource Manual. AVMA, USDA, and the US FDA Guidance 187 for industry Schaumburg, IL. that may be helpful in the conduct of research with AVMA (American Veterinary Medical Association). 2020. AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals: 2020 edition. GE animals (FDA, 2009). FDA Guidance 187 does not https://www.avma.org/sites/default/files/2020-01/2020_Eu- address GEd animals and is currently in revision, so at thanasia_Final_1-15-20.pdf. this time there are no regulations specifically in force AWA (Animal Welfare Act). 1990. Animal Welfare Act. PL (Public that address GEd animal use, care, or welfare. Law) 89–544. Accessed January 14, 2010. www.nal.usda.gov/ awic/legislat/awa.htm. Batchelder, C. A., M. Bertolini, J. B. Mason, A. L. Moyer, K. A. Research Involving Cloning Hoffert, S. G. Petkov, T. R. Famula, J. Angelos, L. W. George, and G. B. Anderson. 2007. Perinatal physiology in cloned and of Agricultural Animals normal calves: Hematologic and biochemical profiles. Cloning Stem Cells 9:83–96. https://doi.org/10.1089/clo.2006.0038. Animal cloning (Vajta and Gjerris, 2006) is an as- BIO (Biotechnology Industry Organization). 2009. BIO Guidance sisted reproductive technology (FDA, 2008) similar to for Genetically Engineered Animal Stewardship. BIO, Wash- artificial insemination, embryo transfer, and in vitro ington, DC. https://www.bio.org/articles/bio-guidance-geneti- fertilization. The current technique used for animal cally-engineered-animal-stewardship. CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology). 2003. Ani- cloning is somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). There mal Agriculture’s Future Through Biotechnology, Part 1, Bio- are no published US guidelines for unique requirements technology in Animal Agriculture: An Overview. Issue Paper regarding the care and use of animal clones in research. 23. CAST, Ames, Iowa. http://www.cast-science.org/ websit- The care and use of animal clones does not differ from eUploads/publicationPDFs/animalbiotech.pdf. that required for the animal from which the genotype CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology). 2007. The Role of Transgenic Livestock in the Treatment of Human is sourced. In addition, because the progeny of animal Disease. Issue Paper 35. CAST, Ames, IA. http://www.cast- clones are not clones, progeny do not require special science.org/websiteUploads/publicationPDFs/Medications_Is- consideration. sue_Paper_35_final_pdf142.pdf. CAST (Council for Agricultural Science and Technology). 2009. Animal Productivity and Genetic Diversity: Cloned and Trans- Disposition of GE Animals and Clones genic Animals. Issue Paper 43. CAST, Ames, IA. http://www. castscience.org/websiteUploads/publicationPDFs/CAST%20 The disposition of GE animals and clones may be of Animal%20Productivity165.pdf. interest to animal agriculture, stakeholders in the food CDC-FSAP (Centers for Disease Control-Federal Select Agent Pro- chain, and the US government (FDA) because of issues gram). 2005. Possession, Use, and Transfer of Biological Agents involving the emergence of new policies by internation- and Toxins. 7 CFR, Part 331 and 9 CFR, Part 121. https:// www.selectagents.gov/selectagentsandtoxinslist.html. al governments (Codex Alimentarius, 2008). Thus, it is CDC-NIH (Centers for Disease Control-National Institutes of recommended that institutions and researchers partici- Health). 2000. Primary Containment for Biohazards: Selection, pate in the Livestock Industry Clone Registry, whereby Installation, and Use of Biological Safety Cabinets. 2nd ed. US animal clones are registered in the database or registry. Govt. Printing Office, Washington, DC. This registry is part of the Supply Chain Management CDC-NIH (Centers for Disease Control-National Institutes of Health). 2007. Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical program developed by livestock cloning companies to Laboratories. 5th ed. Department of Health and Human Ser- identify cattle and porcine clones in the United States. vices, US Govt. Printing Office, Washington, DC. For more information about the registry, please see CIOMS-ICLAS (Council for International Organization of Medical https://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/ Sciences-International Council for Laboratory Animal Science). restrictions-on-gmos.pdf. 2012. International Guiding Principles for Biomedical Research Involving Animals. https://olaw.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ Guiding_Principles_2012.pdf. REFERENCES Clark, J. M. 1993. Planning for safety: Biological and chemical haz- ards. Lab. Anim. 22:33–38. AAALAC. 2018. International regulations and resources. AAALAC Codex Alimentarius. 2008. Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety International. https://www.aaalac.org/resources/international- Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant DNA Animals. regs.cfm. CAC/GL68-2008. http://www.codexalimentarius.net/down- Acha, P. N., and B. Szyfres. 2001. Zoonoses and Communicable Dis- load/standards/11023/CXG_068e.pdf. eases Common to Man and Animals. 3rd ed. Vol. I: Bacteriosis Council of Europe. 1986. European Convention for the Protection of and Mycoses. Pan American Health Organization, Washington, Vertebrate Animals used for Experimental and Other Scientific DC. Purposes. Strasbourg, 18.III.1986 (ETS123). Text amended ac- Acha, P. N., and B. Szyfres. 2003. Zoonoses and Communicable cording to the provisions of the Protocol (ETS No. 170) as of its Diseases Common to Man and Animals. 3rd ed. Vol. II: Chla- entry into force on 2 December 2005. https://www.coe.int/en/ mydioses, Rickettsioses and Viroses; Vol. III: Parasitoses. Pan web/conventions/full-list/-/conventions/treaty/123. American Health Organization, Washington, DC. Curtis, S. E. 1994. Commentary: Farm animal use in biomedical sci- ARENA-OLAW (Applied Research Ethics National Association-Of- ence—Melding the guidelines. ILAR J. 36:35–39. https://doi. fice of Laboratory Animal Welfare). 2002. Institutional Animal org/10.1093/ilar.36.2.35. Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 7 Dennis, M. B. 2000. Humane endpoints for genetically engineered Human Services, Bethesda, MD. https://olaw.nih.gov/sites/de- animal models. ILAR J. 41:94–98. https://doi.org/10.1093/ fault/files/PHSPolicyLabAnimals.pdf. ilar.41.2.94. NRC (National Research Council). 1991. Education and Training in Dennis, M. B. 2002. Welfare issues of genetically modified animals. the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals: A Guide for Develop- ILAR J. 43:100–109. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.43.2.100. ing Institutional Programs. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC. European Food Safety Authority. 2012. Update on the state of play NRC (National Research Council). 2002. Animal Biotech- of animal health and welfare and environmental impact of nology: Science-Based Concerns. National Academies animals derived from SCNT closing and their offspring, and Press, Washington, DC. http://www.nap.edu/openbook. food safety of products obtained from those animals. EFSA J. php?isbn=0309084393&page=R1. 10:2794. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2794. NRC (National Research Council). 2011. Guide for the Care and European Union. 2010. EU Directive 2010/63/EU of the Europe- Use of Laboratory Animals. 8th ed. National Academies Press. an Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on Washington, DC. https://olaw.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Stras- Guide-for-the-Care-and-Use-of-Laboratory-Animals.pdf. bourg, 22.10.2010 (Directive 2010/63/EU). Off. J. L276:33–79. Ogden, B. E., W. Pang, T. Agui, and B. H. Lee. 2016. Laboratory https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ: animal laws, regulations, guidelines and standards in China L:2010:276:0033:0079:EN:PDF. mainland, Japan, and Korea. ILAR J. 57:301–311. https://doi. FDA (US Food and Drug Administration). 2008. Animal Cloning— org/10.1093/ilar/ilw018. A Risk Assessment. http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/ Oki, G. S., E. D. Prentice, N. L. Garnett, D. F. Schwindaman, and SafetyHealth/AnimalCloning/ucm055489.htm. C. Y. Wigglesworth. 1996. Model for performing institutional FDA (US Food and Drug Administration). 2009. Guidance for In- animal care and use committee: Continuing review of animal dustry 187 Regulation of Genetically Engineered Animals Con- research. Contemp. Top. Lab. Anim. Sci. 35:53–56. taining Heritable Recombinant DNA Products. https://www. OSHA. 2011. Indoor air quality in commercial and institutional build- federalregister.gov/documents/2009/01/16/E9-862/guidance- ings. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, OSHA for-industry-on-regulation-of-genetically-engineered-animals- 3430-04 2011. https://www.osha.gov/Publications/3430indoor- containing-heritable. air-quality-sm.pdf. Fontes, B. 2008. Institutional responsibilities in contamination Petersen, B. 2018. Chapter 7: DNA nucleases and their use in live- control for research animals and in occupational health and stock production. Pages 123–148 in Animal Biotechnology 2. H. safety for animal handlers. ILAR J. 49:326–337. https://doi. Niemann and C. Wrenzycki, ed. Springer, Cham, Switzerland. org/10.1093/ilar.49.3.326. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-92348-2_7. Granstrom, D. E. 2003. Agricultural (nonbiomedical) animal re- Prentice, E. D., D. A. Crouse, and M. D. Mann. 1992. Scientific mer- search outside the laboratory: A review of guidelines for insti- it review: The role of the IACUC. Ilar News 34:15–19. https:// tutional animal care and use committees. ILAR J. 44:206–210. doi.org/10.1093/ilar.34.1-2.15. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.44.3.206. Silverman, M. A., J. Suckow, and S. Murphy, ed. 2006. The IACUC Greene, M. E., M. E. Pitts, and M. L. James. 2007. Training strate- Handbook. 2nd ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. gies for institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) Stricklin, W. R., and J. A. Mench. 1994. Oversight of the use of ag- members and the institutional official (IO). ILAR J. 48:131– ricultural animals in university teaching and research. Ilar News 142. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.48.2.131. 36:9–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar.36.1.9. Kerst, J. 2003. An ergonomics process for the care and use of re- Tan, W. S., D. F. Carlson, M. W. Walton, S. C. Fahrenkrug, and search animals. ILAR J. 44:3–12. https://doi.org/10.1093/ P. B. Hackett. 2012. Precision editing of large animal genomes. ilar.44.1.3. Adv. Genet. 80:37–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12- Kirkhorn, S. R., and V. F. Garry. 2000. Agricultural lung diseases. 404742-6.00002-8. Environ. Health Perspect. 108(Suppl. 4):705–712. Tillman, P. 1994. Integrating agricultural and biomedical research Kreger, M. D. 1995. Training materials for animal facility personnel. policies: Conflicts and opportunities. ILAR J. 36:29–35. https:// AWIC Quick Bibliography Series, 95–08. Natl. Agric. Library, doi.org/10.1093/ilar.36.2.29. Beltsville, MD. Underwood, W. J. 2005. Training for best practices for agricultural Kues, W. A., and H. Niemann. 2011. Advances in farm animal trans- program. Lab. Anim. (NY) 34:29–32. https://doi.org/10.1038/ genesis. Prev. Vet. Med. 102:146–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. laban0905-29. prevetmed.2011.04.009. USDA. 1985. 9CFR1.A: Animal Welfare. Accessed Nov. 4, 2017. Laible, G. 2009. Enhancing livestock through genetic engineer- https://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/final-rules-animal-welfare- ing—Recent advances and future prospects. Comp. Immunol. 9-cfr-parts-1-2-and-3 USDA. 2018. Animal Welfare Act. Na- Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 32:123–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tional Agricultural Library, US Department of Agriculture, cimid.2007.11.012. Washington, DC. https://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/animal-wel- Mann, M. D., and E. D. Prentice. 2004. Should IACUC review sci- fare-act. entific merit of animal research projects? Lab. Anim. (NY) USDA-APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service). 2018. 33:26–31. https://doi.org/10.1038/laban0104-26. 9 CFR part 1A: Animal Welfare. https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi- Murray, J. D., and E. A. Maga. 2016. Genetically engineered live- bin/text-idx?SID=b1cbc38fc683272a198ead296c4acfd0&mc=tr stock for agriculture: A generation after the first transgenic ani- ue&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title09/9CIsubchapA.tpl. mal research conference. Transgenic Res. 25:321–327. https:// USDL OSHA (US Department of Labor-Occupational Safety and doi.org/10.1007/s11248-016-9927-7. Health Administration). 1995. 29CFR§1910.95: Occupational Niemann, H., and C. Wrenzycki, ed. 2018. Animal Biotechnology noise exposure. USDL-OSHA, Washington, DC. https://www. 2. Springer International Publishing AG, Cham, Switzerland. ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=f74cc9e1b9e9cb4bfcf8ec8234810 NIH (National Institutes for Health). 2002. NIH Guidelines for Re- 531&mc=true&node=se29.5.1910_195&rgn=div8. search Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules. National In- Vajta, G., and M. Gjerris. 2006. Science and technology of farm ani- stitutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. http://oba.od.nih.gov/oba/ mal cloning: State of the art. Anim. Reprod. Sci. 92:211–230. rac/guidelines_02/NIH_Guidelines_Apr_02.htm. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anireprosci.2005.12.001. NIH (National Institutes for Health). 2015. Public Health Service Vemulapalli, T. H., S. S. Donkin, T. B. Lescun, P. A. O’Neil, and Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. NIH P. A. Zollner. 2017. Considerations when writing and reviewing Publication No. 15-8013. Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, a higher education teaching protocol involving animals. J. Am. National Institutes of Health, US Department of Health and Assoc. Lab. Anim. Sci. 56:500–508. Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 1: INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 8 Wald, P. H., and G. M. Stave. 2003. Occupational medicine pro- Wheeler, M. B. 2007. Agricultural applications for transgen- grams for animal research facilities. ILAR J. 44:57–71. https:// ic livestock. Trends Biotechnol. 25:204–210. https://doi. doi.org/10.1093/ilar.44.1.57. org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2007.03.006. Wells, D. N. 2005. Animal cloning: Problems and prospects. Rev. Sci. Tech. 24:251–264. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.24.1.1566. Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 2: AGRICULTURAL ANIMAL HEALTH CARE Agricultural animal health care involves proper man- animal use, which permits physiological and behavioral agement and husbandry as well as veterinary care. adaptation to the new environment. The veterinarian Proper management is essential for the well-being of or their veterinary designee should establish general animals, the validity and effectiveness of research and acclimation guidelines for each species. Any modifica- teaching activities, and the health and safety of animal tions to the general program should be discussed with care personnel. Sound animal husbandry programs pro- the attending veterinarian before animals are shipped. vide systems of care that permit animals to grow, ma- In some cases, animals may require an extended ac- ture, reproduce, express some species-specific behavior, climation period because of their history or health and be healthy. Specific operating procedures depend status. However, some studies, such as comparisons of on factors that are unique to individual institutions. metaphylactic treatments for bovine respiratory disease Well-trained and motivated personnel can often achieve post-shipment, need to begin as soon as animals arrive. high-quality animal care with less than ideal physical Such exemptions from the acclimation period must be facilities and equipment. scientifically justified and approved by the institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC). ANIMAL PROCUREMENT QUARANTINE When an institution acquires new animals, atten- tion must be paid to applicable international, federal, Quarantine is the separation of newly received ani- and state regulations and institutional procedures, par- mals from those already in the facility or on the premises ticularly those dealing with transportation and animal until the health of the new animals has been evaluated health. All animals must be obtained and transported and found to be acceptable. The program veterinar- legally. The program or attending veterinarian, in con- ian should ensure that quarantine facilities or locations junction with the principal scientist, should formulate are appropriate and that quarantine procedures are written procedures to assess the health status of a herd consistent with current veterinary practices and ap- or flock obtained from a vendor before acquiring ani- plicable regulations. The quarantine period should be mals. The institution should develop a mechanism and long enough to observe signs of infectious disease or process of control for animal acquisition that ensures obtain diagnostic evidence of infection status. Quaran- coordination of resources that will preclude the arrival tine and testing of animals before introduction is espe- of animals in advance of preparation of adequate hous- cially important for herds or flocks that have attained ing, nutrition, and appropriate veterinary quarantine specific-pathogen-free status, but addition of animals procedures. Quality control for vendors and knowledge should be discouraged in specific-pathogen-free herds of the history of purchased animals is part of an ad- or flocks. If the health history of newly received animals equate institutional veterinary care program. Animals is unknown, the quarantine program should be more of unknown origin or from stockyards should only be comprehensive and sufficiently long to allow expression used if necessary; such animals may pose significant or detection of diseases present in the early incubation unknown health risks compared with animals of known stage. Exceptions to quarantine practices should be ap- origin, and therefore should be handled appropriately. proved by the attending veterinarian or their veterinary Newly acquired animals should undergo a quarantine designee in advance of shipment of the animals. and acclimation period for preventive and clinical treat- The program veterinarian, or skilled personnel un- ments as appropriate for their species health status. der the direction of the program veterinarian, should perform an initial examination and subsequent daily ACCLIMATION AND STABILIZATION observations of newly received animals. Animals should be observed in quarantine until they are cleared for in- Newly arrived animals require a period of acclima- troduction into a herd or facility. During the quarantine tion. Acclimation refers to a stabilization period before period, animals should be vaccinated and treated for 9  CHAPTER 2: AGRICULTURAL ANIMAL HEALTH CARE 10 diseases and parasites as appropriate to protect their ian is not required to be the sole provider of veterinary health and maintain the health of animals in the home care and can delegate authority to other qualified indi- facility. In addition to having adequate quarantine pro- viduals. However, the program veterinarian should be cedures, research facilities and animal use protocols responsible for the veterinary care of all animals and should be designed to minimize the risk of introducing should have frequent and direct communications with or transmitting disease agents. others providing care. The program veterinarian should utilize the expertise of other professionals when making determinations about agricultural animal care. Trained VETERINARY CARE non-veterinary staff and study personnel listed on the Attending or Program Veterinarian approved IACUC protocol may administer treatments according to standard operating procedures approved An institution using agricultural animals in research by the program veterinarian. or teaching should have an official with the credentials and authority to manage an institutional animal care Preventive Medicine program. The housing, feeding, and nonmedical care of such animals should be directed by a veterinarian or Adequate agricultural animal health care in research scientist trained and experienced in the proper care, and teaching involves a written and implemented pro- handling, and use of each species of agricultural animal gram for disease prevention, surveillance, diagnosis, used. A qualified veterinarian must be responsible for treatment, and endpoint resolution. The objectives of the agricultural animal health care program. This per- such a program are to ensure animal health and wel- son may be designated the attending or program vet- fare, minimize pain and distress, utilize animal pro- erinarian. Although this model may not be mandated duction practices, prevent zoonosis, assist investigators for every institution, it is the position of the Ag Guide on study-related animal health issues, and avoid con- that every institution should have a model like it. The taminants or residues in animal products. The program Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR)/Na- should include training for animal users regarding ani- tional Research Council Guide for the Care and Use of mal behavior, production practices, humane and appro- Laboratory Animals (The ILAR Guide; NRC, 2011) de- priate restraint for the species involved, anesthesia, an- fines the attending veterinarian as a veterinarian “with algesia, surgical and postsurgical care, and euthanasia. sufficient authority, including access to all animals and A mechanism for direct, frequent, and regular com- resources, to manage the program of animal care.” The munication must be established among personnel who attending or program veterinarian is a resource who are responsible for daily animal care and observation, can give research personnel advice that ensures that animal users, and the program veterinarian. This will humane needs of animals are met and that is, to the ex- help ensure that timely and accurate animal health in- tent possible, compatible with scientific requirements. formation is effectively communicated. Animal Welfare Act regulations and Public Health Service policy (US Department of Health and Human Sick, Injured, and Dead Animals Services, 2015) require that the veterinarian serving in this role have the authority to oversee other aspects of Animal care personnel must be trained to recognize animal care and use, including animal husbandry and signs of illness and injury. When appropriate, sick and nutrition, sanitation practices, zoonosis control, and injured animals should be segregated from the main hazard containment. group to protect them and the other animals, observed Research and teaching institutions should provide at least once daily, and provided with veterinary care as investigators and instructors with access to a veteri- appropriate. When animals are separated, a mechanism narian who has experience in the care of agricultural should be in place to communicate to staff the status animals. The veterinarian can be full-time, part-time, of the animals and to ensure proper daily, weekend, or a private practitioner and should have capability to holiday, and emergency care. In some circumstances, ensure that the provisions of the program are met. This segregation is not feasible or may disrupt the social program veterinarian should be provided access to all hierarchy, cause additional stress to the animal, or ad- research and teaching animals and to any related docu- versely affect research. The advantages of segregation ments including health care records. The program vet- should be weighed against its disadvantages, especially erinarian should also be involved in development and for mild illnesses or injuries that can be easily managed. oversight of the veterinary care program. This includes Care should be taken to minimize spread of pathogens providing oversight of all aspects of animal care and from ill animals to healthy animals by observing ap- use such as protocol review, establishment of anesthetic propriate biocontainment measures. Incurably ill or in- and analgesic guidelines, development of study removal jured animals with unrelievable pain or distress should criteria, and responsible conduct of research activities. be killed in the most humane way as soon as possible by Veterinary involvement in these activities helps to en- trained personnel. Unexpected deaths should be report- sure animal health and welfare. The program veterinar- ed to the attending veterinarian or their designee. Dead Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 2: AGRICULTURAL ANIMAL HEALTH CARE 11 animals are potential sources of infection and should be scientist, and the IACUC. The ACLAM statement on disposed of promptly by a commercial rendering service Medical Records for Animals Used in Research Teaching or other appropriate means (e.g., burial, composting, and Testing (Field et al., 2007) suggests that “Nota- or incineration), following applicable state and local tions in the medical record should be made by individu- ordinances and regulations. Postmortem examination als who have administered treatments, or made direct of fresh or well-preserved animals may provide impor- observations or evaluations of the animal(s) or their di- tant animal health information and research data, and agnostic results, or their designee. Individuals typically can aid in preventing further losses. When warranted responsible for making notations in the record include and appropriate, waste and bedding removed from a veterinary staff (veterinarians or veterinary techni- site once occupied by a dead animal should be made cians), animal husbandry staff (animal care staff, man- inaccessible to other animals and the site disinfected agers, supervisors), and research staff (e.g., principal appropriately. investigators, study directors or research technicians). All entries in the record should be dated, indicate the Medical Records originator of the entry (e.g., initials, signature, and electronic signature) and be legible to someone other An important component of an agricultural animal than the writer.” health program is maintaining records that can be used to monitor animal health events, both physical and be- havioral, as well as outcomes and levels of production. SURGERY Medical records should comply with the American Col- lege of Laboratory Animal Medicine (www.aclam.org) Multiple Major Surgical Procedures statement on medical records (Field et al., 2007). The ILAR Guide (NRC, 2011) differentiates major Group health records may be appropriate for animals from minor surgery as follows: “major survival surgery that are kept as cohorts (e.g., in a colony, school, flock, (e.g. laparotomy, thoracotomy, joint replacement, and herd, or room), particularly because the animals under- limb amputation) penetrates and exposes the body cav- go daily observation or evaluation by trained individu- ity, and may produce substantial impairment of physi- als. The institution, in cooperation with the program cal or physiologic functions, or may involve extensive veterinarian, should determine the method(s) by which tissue dissection or transection. Minor survival surgery medical records are maintained. Oversight of medical does not expose a body cavity, causes little or no physi- records is the responsibility of the principal investiga- cal impairment and would include suturing, peripheral tor, the program veterinarian, and the IACUC. When vessel cannulation, and percutaneous biopsy, routine institutional representatives determine that a medical agricultural animal procedures such as castration, and record should be created, the record typically contains most procedures routinely done on an ‘outpatient’ ba- the following information: sis in veterinary clinical practice.” Minimally invasive surgery such as laparoscopy may benefit the animal 1. Identification of the animal(s) or group(s); relative to traditional surgical techniques. 2. Observational information, such as the animal’s Performance of more than one major survival surgery behavior, results of physical examinations such on a single animal is discouraged but may be necessary as weight, and observed abnormalities, illnesses, to ensure or maintain the health of the animal. Long- or injuries; lived animals may undergo multiple major surgeries, 3. Immunizations and other prophylactic treat- such as a cow that requires surgery for correction of ments and procedures; displaced abomasum and cesarean section for thera- 4. Documentation and interpretation of diagnostic peutic purposes. Multiple major survival surgeries per- tests when required; formed for nontherapeutic reasons should be performed 5. Documentation of interventions by the research- only when justified, as reviewed and approved by the er; IACUC. Multiple major surgeries that produce minor 6. Treatments prescribed and administered; physiologic or physical impairment and reduce overall 7. Clinical response and follow-up information; animal use, such as multiple endoscopic laparotomies in 8. Descriptions of surgical procedures, anesthesia, sheep for reproductive purposes, may be appropriate. analgesia, and perioperative care; Likewise, multiple surgical procedures may be justified 9. Methods used to control pain and distress; when they are related components of the same project 10. Documentation of resolution; (e.g., cannulation of the digestive tract at several loca- 11. Documentation of euthanasia or other disposi- tions). tion; and 12. Necropsy findings if necropsy is indicated. Anesthesia and Analgesia The record system must be structured so that infor- mation is easily collected, gathered, analyzed, summa- Painful animal husbandry-related procedures (stan- rized, and available to the veterinarian, the principal dard agricultural practices), such as castration, dehorn- Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 2: AGRICULTURAL ANIMAL HEALTH CARE 12 ing, and tail docking, should be conducted with the use surgical skills for persons who will conduct or assist of pain management protocols appropriate for the age with experimental surgery. The training program must and species of animal involved. Details of these pro- be reviewed by the IACUC and under the direction of cedures are provided in the species-specific chapters. the program veterinarian or their designee. Training The program veterinarian should advise investigators provided must be documented and the competency of about the choice and use of analgesics, anesthetics, or personnel ensured. any other pain- or distress-relieving measure. This may include recommended times for withholding of food Surgical Facilities and Aseptic Technique and water to minimize the risk of adverse events such as vomiting or aspiration after anesthesia. After being Major survival surgeries should be performed in fa- trained and subsequently supervised by a qualified sci- cilities designed and prepared to accommodate sur- entist or veterinarian, technical personnel may admin- gery whenever possible, and appropriate aseptic surgi- ister anesthetics and analgesics as part of a research or cal procedures should be used. Good surgical practice teaching protocol. includes the use of surgical caps, masks, gowns, and If a painful or distressing experimental procedure sterile gloves, as well as aseptic surgical site prepara- must be conducted without the use of an anesthetic or tion and draping. Sterile instruments must be used. analgesic because such use would prevent collection of Manufacturers’ recommendations must be followed for useful data, this must be scientifically documented in chemical sterilants. For non-survival surgeries, during the animal care and use protocol and approved by the which the animal is euthanized before recovery from IACUC. In such cases, appropriately validated pain as- anesthesia, it may not be necessary to follow all aseptic sessment methods should be used in conjunction with techniques, but the instruments and surrounding area analgesic protocols (rescue analgesia) to manage pain should be clean. and ensure that animal distress and suffering are mini- Minor surgical procedures that do not penetrate a mized (Coetzee, 2011). body cavity or produce substantial impairment (e.g., Paralytic drugs (e.g., succinylcholine and other cu- wound suturing, peripheral-vessel cannulation, certain rariform drugs) are not anesthetics. They must not be standard agricultural practices) may be performed un- used unless animals are in a surgical plane of anesthesia der less stringent conditions in accordance with stan- and thus are unconscious. Use of paralytic agents must dard agricultural practices (Brown et al., 1993). be justified in the animal use protocol, and appropriate Therapeutic and emergency surgeries (e.g., caesarean ventilation and monitoring for depth of anesthesia must section, treatment of bloat, repair of displaced aboma- be described. sum) may sometimes need to be performed in agricul- Sedatives and tranquilizers are psychotropic sub- tural settings that are not conducive to rigid asepsis. stances that alter mental processes or behavior but do However, every effort should be made to conduct such not produce anesthesia or, in most cases, long-lasting surgeries in a sanitary or aseptic manner and to use an- analgesia (Coetzee, 2011). However, these medications esthetics or analgesics commensurate with the risks to can reduce the dose of anesthetic required. When used the animal’s well-being. Research protocols that carry alone, tranquilizers should only be used to allay fear a high likelihood of the need for emergency surgery and anxiety. Their use may render restraint less stress- should contain provisions for handling anticipated cas- ful and enable animals to adapt more easily to novel es. Surgical packs and equipment for such events should situations. However, these compounds may not provide be prepared and readily available for emergency use. long-lasting pain relief, especially when pain is associ- ated with tissue damage and inflammation. Postsurgical Care Surgery Personnel Appropriate facilities should be available for animals that are recovering from general anesthesia and major Inappropriately performed surgical techniques or surgery. The following are recommended: inadequate postoperative care will result in unneces- sary pain and distress. Experimental surgery on ag- Segregation from other animals until recovery ricultural animals should be performed or supervised from anesthesia; by an experienced veterinarian or their designee, or by Clean and sanitary recovery area; research scientists who are trained, highly skilled, and Adequate space, with consideration for physical experienced in performing experimental surgery, in ac- comfort and well-being of the animal, in a place cordance with established protocols approved by an suitable for recovery from anesthesia without in- IACUC. Researchers should seek input from a veteri- jury (e.g., a room or stall with protective covering narian experienced in basic surgical techniques for the on floors and walls); subject species when establishing surgical protocols to Environmental controls sufficient to ensure main- be approved by an IACUC. Institutions should provide tenance of environmental temperature within the basic surgical training and opportunities to upgrade thermoneutral zone and animal temperature with- Ag Guide, 4th ed. 2020  CHAPTER 2: AGRICULTURAL ANIMAL HEALTH CARE 13 in the normal range during postsurgical recovery; ZOONOSES and Trained personnel for postsurgical observation to Zoonotic diseases are defined as infectious diseases help ensure a safe recovery. Postsurgical observa- in animals that can be transmitted to humans, who, in tion should be provided until the animal is fully turn, may transmit the infectious agent to another ani- recovered from anesthesia, ambulatory, and able mal. Information pertaining to zoonotic diseases can be to return safely to its original housing location. found online in the Merck Veterinary Manual (https:// www.merckvetmanual.com/). A current list and inci- dence of notifiable diseases, such as Q-fever (Coxiella Signs of Pain and Distress burnetii), may be obtained from the US Centers for Dis- Pain is an aversive feeling or sensation associated ease Control and Prevention (http://www.cdc.gov/). with actual or potential tissue damage resulting in The program veterinarian, working in collaboration physiological, neuroendocrine, and behavioral changes with scientists or instructors of record, should estab- that indicate animal distress. Although pain and dis- lish appropriate preventive medicine programs and hus- tress in animals can often be detected by an experi- bandry practices to decrease the likelihood of transmis- enced observer, these conditions are sometimes unap- sion of potential zoonotic agents. Each institution must parent, especially in stoic animals. When unanticipated have an appropriate occupational health and safety pain or distress are detected, animal-care attendants or program for evaluating human health risks associated research staff should take immediate ameliorative ac- with animal contact and must take steps to ensure that tion as necessary and contact the program veterinarian. health risks for each individual are assessed and man- Pain can be one of the earliest signs of disease or in- aged at an acceptable level. jury. Animals in pain may become less active, restless, reduce feed consumption, grind their teeth, vocalize, or RESIDUE AVOIDANCE appear frightened and agitated. Animals in pain may resis