ICLAS Laboratory Animal Quality Network (LAQN) programs currently consist of the Performance Evaluation Program (PEP), which focuses on microbial monitoring by and for laboratory animal diagnostic laboratories, and the Genetic Reference Monitoring Program (GENRef), which provides assay-ready reference DNA for genetic testing of mouse strains. Since 2008, PEP has grown to become a truly international program with participating laboratories in 5 continents. Launched in 2016, GENRef currently distributes DNA from 12 common inbred mouse strains for use in genetic monitoring of locally inbred colonies as well as for genetic testing of stocks, particularly genetically engineered stocks, of uncertain origins. GENRef has the capacity to include additional strains as well as additional species. PEP and GENRef provide the reagents at cost, as a resource to the international scientific community, in the interest of improving research quality in an environment of growing concern for research quality, rigor, and reproducibility.

Journal Article The ILAR Journal Is Taking a Hiatus Get access ILAR Journal, ilac008, https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilac008 Published: 19 July 2022 Article history Received: 20 June 2022 Revision received: 20 June 2022 Accepted: 20 June 2022 Published: 19 July 2022

There is no prescribed stage or standardized point at which an animal model protocol is reviewed for reproducibility and translatability. The method of review for a reproducible and translatable study is not consistently documented in peer literature, and this is a major challenge for those working with animal models of human diseases. If the study is ill designed, it is impossible to perform an accurate harm/benefit analysis. In addition, there may be an ethical challenge if the work is not reproducible and translatable. Animal welfare regulations and other documents of control clearly state the role of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees are to look at science justification within the context of animal welfare. This article, concentrating on models not governed by regulations, outlines issues and offers recommendations for refining animal model review with a goal to improve study reproducibility and translatability.

Interest in marmosets as research models has seen exponential growth over the last decade, especially given that the research community is eager to improve on gaps with historical animal models for behavioral and cognitive disorders. The spectrum of human disease traits that present naturally in marmosets, as well as the range of analogous human behaviors that can be assessed in marmosets, makes them ideally suited as translational models for behavioral and cognitive disorders. Regardless of the specific research aims of any project, without close collaboration between researchers, veterinarians, and animal care staff, it would be impossible to meet these goals. Behavior is inherently variable, as are marmosets that are genetically and phenotypically diverse. Thus, to ensure rigor, reliability, and reproducibility in results, it is important that in the research environment, the animal's daily husbandry and veterinary needs are being met and align with the research goals while keeping the welfare of the animal the most critical and highest priority. Much of the information described herein provides details on key components for successful behavioral testing, based on a compendium of methods from peer-reviewed publications and our own experiences. Specific areas highlighted include habituation procedures, selection of appropriate rewards, optimization of testing environments, and ways to integrate regular veterinary and husbandry procedures into the research program with minimal disruptions to the behavioral testing plan. This article aims to provide a broad foundation for researchers new to establishing behavioral and cognitive testing paradigms in marmosets and especially for the veterinary and husbandry colleagues who are indispensable collaborators of these research projects.

Abstract Although the common marmoset (Callithrix jacchus) has been maintained in captivity in biomedical research settings for decades, interest and use of the species as an animal model for a diverse array of purposes has increased in the 21st century. Unfortunately, the development of validated animal care standards such as nutrition, husbandry, and clinical care has not expanded with the same rapidity as the use of the species in research. The goal of this themed issue of the ILAR Journal is to review current literature relevant to topics that impact marmoset health, welfare, and use in research. As the population of captive marmosets increases worldwide, the editors urge scientists, veterinary clinicians, and colony managers to continue conducting and publishing robust studies to develop evidence-based standards related to marmoset care and use. The editors also encourage IACUCs and other institutional review bodies to seek training on topics relevant to marmoset welfare and develop related policies prior to acquiring animals as a novel species.

With the recent upswing of infectious disease outbreaks (coronavirus, influenza, Ebola, etc), there is an ever-increasing need for biocontainment animal use protocols to better address the research of emerging diseases and to increase the health of both animals and humans. It is imperative that we as a research community ensure these protocols are conducted with the utmost scrutiny and regulatory compliance for the welfare of the animals as well as the health and safety concerns of the individual conducting these studies. Both the welfare of the animals and the health and safety of the research staff must be balanced with the integrity of the science being studied. Even prior to reviewing biocontainment protocols, the research stakeholders should have professional and collegial interactions across all levels of the proposed project. These stakeholders should include the attending veterinarian, the principal investigator, the sponsor, and any organic institutional health and safety assets (environmental health and safety, occupational health, biosafety personnel, medical personnel, facilities operations and maintenance, etc). At most institutions, these stakeholders are members of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee and may not possess the necessary tools to properly assess an Animal Biosafety Level 3 and 4 animal use protocol. It is the goal of this article to review some basic concepts of biocontainment, discuss critical communications and preapprovals, clinical observations, medical interventions and supportive care, scientific and study endpoints, euthanasia criteria, animal manipulations, documentation, training, emergency response and contingency plans, security, and decontamination and provide a scenario-based and informative thought-provoking process Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee members and veterinary staff may consider during Animal Biosafety Level 3 and 4 protocol review. These topics will enhance the ability of all stakeholders to balance the protection of the people with the integrity of the science and ultimately the welfare of the animal.

Abstract Reproducible and reliable scientific investigation depends on the identification and consideration of various intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may affect the model system used. The impact of these factors must be managed during all phases of a study: planning, execution, and reporting. The value of in vivo (animal) research has come under increasing scrutiny over the past decade because of multiple reports documenting poor translatability to human studies. These failures have been attributed to various causes, including poor study design and execution as well as deficiencies in reporting. It is important to recognize that achieving reproducible and reliable preclinical research results is a joint responsibility that requires a partnership between the investigative team and the animal care and use program staff. The myriad of intrinsic factors, such as species, strain/substrain, age, sex, physiologic and health status, and extrinsic factors, including temperature, humidity, lighting, housing system, and diet, need to be recognized and managed during study planning and execution, as they can influence animal physiology and biological response. Of equal importance is the need to document and report these details. The ARRIVE and PREPARE guidelines were developed by concerned scientists, veterinarians, statisticians, journal editors, and funding agencies to assist investigative teams and scientific journals manage and report on intrinsic and extrinsic factors to improve reproducibility and reliability. This issue of the ILAR Journal will focus on the various extrinsic factors that have been recognized to confound animal research.

Abstract The principal investigator is an expert on the topic under investigation. The veterinarian is an expert in the health and wellness of an animal. But what, exactly, can ethicists add to discussions about animal research? This special issue of the ILAR Journal considers how contemporary ethics scholarship can be relevant to animal research. The articles were selected to highlight how clear thinking about values and the implications of those values can inform which research is conducted and how it is conducted.

The publication of reproducible, replicable, and translatable data in studies utilizing animal models is a scientific, practical, and ethical necessity. This requires careful planning and execution of experiments and accurate reporting of results. Recognition that numerous developmental, environmental, and test-related factors can affect experimental outcomes is essential for a quality study design. Factors commonly considered when designing studies utilizing aquatic animal species include strain, sex, or age of the animal; water quality; temperature; and acoustic and light conditions. However, in the aquatic environment, it is equally important to consider normal species behavior, group dynamics, stocking density, and environmental complexity, including tank design and structural enrichment. Here, we will outline normal species and social behavior of 2 commonly used aquatic species: zebrafish (Danio rerio) and Xenopus (X. laevis and X. tropicalis). We also provide examples as to how these behaviors and the complexity of the tank environment can influence research results and provide general recommendations to assist with improvement of reproducibility and replicability, particularly as it pertains to behavior and environmental complexity, when utilizing these popular aquatic models.

The use of aquatic animals in ecotoxicology, genetic, and biomedical research has grown immensely in recent years, especially due to the increased use of zebrafish in the laboratory setting. Because water is the primary environment of most aquatic species, the composition and management of this water is paramount to ensuring their health and welfare. In this publication, we will describe the important variables in water quality that can influence animal health and research results, using the zebrafish model for detailed specifics of optimal conditions. Wherever possible, recommendations are provided to reduce the potential impact of poor or highly variable water quality, and standards are given which can be used as institutional goals to maximize animal health and welfare and reduce research variability. It is increasingly important that authors of publications describing work done using aquatic models characterize water quality and other environmental conditions of the animal environment so that the work can be repeated and understood in context of these important factors. It is clear that there are a great many extrinsic factors which may influence research outcomes in the aquatics model laboratory setting, and consequently, an increased level of funding will be essential to support continued research exploring these and other important husbandry conditions. References from a large body of literature on this subject are provided.