Moore Elizabeth S, Cleland Thomas A, Williams Wendy O, Peterson Christine M, Singh Bhupinder, Southard Teresa L, Pasch Bret, Labitt Rachael N, Daugherity Erin K
Departments of Biomedical Sciences, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York;, Email:
Departments of Psychology, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.
J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci. 2017 May 1;56(3):307-317.
Tail tip amputation with minimal restraint is not widely used for mouse phlebotomy. In part, this infrequency may reflect policies influenced by tail tip amputation procedures for genotyping, which involve greater handling and tissue removal. To assess tail tip amputation with minimal restraint as a phlebotomy technique, we compared it with 2 more common methods: scruffing with facial vein puncture and lateral tail vein incision with minimal restraint. Blood glucose levels, audible and ultrasonic vocalizations, postphlebotomy activity and grooming behavior, open field and elevated plus maze behaviors, nest-building scores, and histologic changes at the phlebotomy site were evaluated. Mice in the facial vein phlebotomy group produced more audible vocalizations, exhibited lower postphlebotomy activity in the open field, and had more severe histologic changes than did mice in the tail incision and tail tip amputation groups. Facial vein phlebotomy did not affect grooming behavior relative to sham groups, whereas tail vein incision-but not tail tip amputation-increased tail grooming compared with that in control mice. Blood glucose levels, nest-building scores, and elevated plus maze behavior did not differ between groups, and no mice in any group produced ultrasonic vocalizations. Tail tip amputation mice did not perform differently than sham mice in any metric analyzed, indicating that this technique is a potentially superior method of blood collection in mice in terms of animal wellbeing.
在小鼠静脉采血中,极少限制的尾尖截肢法并未得到广泛应用。部分原因在于,这种不常用可能反映了受基因分型尾尖截肢程序影响的政策,该程序涉及更多的处理和组织切除。为了评估极少限制的尾尖截肢法作为一种静脉采血技术,我们将其与另外两种更常用的方法进行了比较:抓颈并穿刺面部静脉以及极少限制的侧尾静脉切开术。我们评估了血糖水平、可听和超声发声、采血后的活动和梳理行为、旷场和高架十字迷宫行为、筑巢得分以及采血部位的组织学变化。与尾静脉切开术组和尾尖截肢术组的小鼠相比,面部静脉采血组的小鼠发出更多可听叫声,在旷场中的采血后活动较低,并且组织学变化更严重。相对于假手术组,面部静脉采血不影响梳理行为,而与对照小鼠相比,尾静脉切开术(而非尾尖截肢术)增加了舔尾行为。各组之间的血糖水平、筑巢得分和高架十字迷宫行为没有差异,并且任何组中均无小鼠发出超声叫声。在分析的任何指标中,尾尖截肢术组的小鼠与假手术组的小鼠表现无异,这表明就动物福利而言,该技术是一种潜在的更优小鼠采血方法。