Williams Scott C, Linske Megan A, Stafford Kirby C
Department of Forestry and Horticulture, Center for Vector Biology and Zoonotic Diseases, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, PO Box 1106, New Haven, CT 06504, USA.
Department of Entomology, Center for Vector Biology and Zoonotic Diseases, The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, PO Box 1106, New Haven, CT 06504, USA.
Animals (Basel). 2020 May 9;10(5):826. doi: 10.3390/ani10050826.
The cardiac puncture technique for obtaining relatively large volume (50-150 µL) blood samples from sedated rodents has been used in research for nearly a century. Historically, its use to phlebotomize and then release live rodents was more common. However, recently its use in a non-terminal capacity frequently imparts negative connotations in part because exsanguination of sedated animals via cardiac puncture is now an American Veterinary Medical Association-approved euthanasia technique. This association has resulted in ethical concerns by manuscript reviewers and in a few instances, outright refusal by some peer-reviewed journals to publish research that utilized the technique. To counter the perceived negative associations with its non-terminal use, we summarized nearly two decades (2001-2019) of capture and handling data throughout Connecticut, resulting in over 7000 cardiac punctures performed on nearly 5000 sedated, live-captured and released spp. We show that our total handling mortality rate (3.7%) was comparable, if not lower, than similar field studies that utilized other phlebotomy techniques. Many public health, integrated tick management, and vector-borne disease ecology studies require samples from individual wild-caught spp. over time to determine intervention efficacy and pathogen infection monitoring, and in such field studies, post-operative care is not an option. Proper execution of cardiac puncture does not increase susceptibility of individuals to predation upon release as can potential ocular abnormalities or infections that can occur as the result of use of other techniques. We posit that neither exsanguination nor resulting euthanasia are requirements of cardiac puncture and that its use is entirely appropriate for obtaining blood samples from live-captured and released spp. Properly performed cardiac puncture is an excellent technique to obtain blood samples from sedated, individual spp. on multiple appropriately-spaced occasions over single trapping seasons while keeping animal welfare a top priority.
从镇静的啮齿动物身上获取相对大量（50 - 150微升）血液样本的心脏穿刺技术在研究中已使用了近一个世纪。历史上，用它对活体啮齿动物进行放血然后再放生的情况更为常见。然而，最近它在非终端用途中的使用常常带有负面含义，部分原因是通过心脏穿刺对镇静动物进行放血现在是美国兽医协会认可的安乐死技术。这种关联引发了稿件评审人员的伦理担忧，在某些情况下，一些同行评审期刊甚至直接拒绝发表使用该技术的研究。为了消除其非终端用途所带来的负面认知，我们总结了康涅狄格州近二十年（2001 - 2019年）的捕获和处理数据，在此期间对近5000只镇静、活体捕获并放生的[物种名称未给出]进行了7000多次心脏穿刺。我们表明，我们的总处理死亡率（3.7%）即便不低于，也与使用其他放血技术的类似野外研究相当。许多公共卫生、蜱虫综合管理以及病媒传播疾病生态学研究需要随着时间推移从个体野生捕获的[物种名称未给出]获取样本，以确定干预效果和病原体感染监测情况，而在这类野外研究中，术后护理并非选项。正确实施心脏穿刺不会像使用其他技术可能导致的潜在眼部异常或感染那样，增加放生后个体被捕食的易感性。我们认为放血和随之而来的安乐死都不是心脏穿刺的必要条件，而且其用于从活体捕获并放生的[物种名称未给出]获取血液样本是完全合适的。正确实施的心脏穿刺是在单个诱捕季节内多次在适当间隔时间从镇静的个体[物种名称未给出]获取血液样本的极佳技术，同时将动物福利放在首位。
