使用无菌成群拭子作为啮齿动物健康监测的替代方法。

IF 1.2 3区 农林科学 Q3 VETERINARY SCIENCES Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science Pub Date : 2022-07-01 Epub Date: 2022-06-28 DOI:10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-22-000024
Mynn Michelle D Varela, Jan Irving A Bibay, Bryan E Ogden, Marcus J Crim, Hla M Htoon
{"title":"使用无菌成群拭子作为啮齿动物健康监测的替代方法。","authors":"Mynn Michelle D Varela, Jan Irving A Bibay, Bryan E Ogden, Marcus J Crim, Hla M Htoon","doi":"10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-22-000024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Routine health monitoring is an integral part of managing SPF rodent colonies. In recent years, rack-level environmental sampling has been introduced as an adjunct method or replacement for exposure of sentinel rodents to soiled bedding. However, rack-level environmental monitoring is not compatible with rodent housing systems that have cage-level filtration. The current study investigated whether exposure of sterile flocked swabs to soiled bedding can be an alternative sampling method for routine health monitoring in mice, thus replacing the use of sentinels in soiled-bedding cages. Flocked swabs were placed in cages containing pooled samples of soiled bedding but no mice; swabs remained there for 90 d, with weekly agitation and biweekly swabbing of the cage floor to mimic the agitation of soiled bedding by sentinel mice and facilitate the collection of dust particles. Fecal samples were collected from both colony and sentinel mice. For environmental samples, exhaust debris was collected from the rack plenum, and dust samples were collected from the exhaust hose. All samples were collected on days 88 through 91 and were tested for multiple pathogens by using real-time PCR assays. To determine the diagnostic agreement of flocked swab sampling with the other methods, we used κ statistics to compare the test results from flocked swabs with those from sentinel feces, exhaust debris, and colony animal feces; we found excellent agreement between the colony feces and the flocked swab methods. The sterile flocked swab method detected all enzootic pathogens in the colonies tested. Results from flocked swab samples had the least agreement with sentinel feces, which also failed to detect the presence of fur mites. This study supports the use of sterile flocked swabs as alternative to using sentinel mice, thus conforming to the guiding principles of replacement and reduction in the use of animals for routine colony health monitoring.</p>","PeriodicalId":50019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science","volume":"61 4","pages":"370-380"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9674010/pdf/jaalas2022000370.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Sterile Flocked Swabs as an Alternative Method for Rodent Health Monitoring.\",\"authors\":\"Mynn Michelle D Varela, Jan Irving A Bibay, Bryan E Ogden, Marcus J Crim, Hla M Htoon\",\"doi\":\"10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-22-000024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Routine health monitoring is an integral part of managing SPF rodent colonies. In recent years, rack-level environmental sampling has been introduced as an adjunct method or replacement for exposure of sentinel rodents to soiled bedding. However, rack-level environmental monitoring is not compatible with rodent housing systems that have cage-level filtration. The current study investigated whether exposure of sterile flocked swabs to soiled bedding can be an alternative sampling method for routine health monitoring in mice, thus replacing the use of sentinels in soiled-bedding cages. Flocked swabs were placed in cages containing pooled samples of soiled bedding but no mice; swabs remained there for 90 d, with weekly agitation and biweekly swabbing of the cage floor to mimic the agitation of soiled bedding by sentinel mice and facilitate the collection of dust particles. Fecal samples were collected from both colony and sentinel mice. For environmental samples, exhaust debris was collected from the rack plenum, and dust samples were collected from the exhaust hose. All samples were collected on days 88 through 91 and were tested for multiple pathogens by using real-time PCR assays. To determine the diagnostic agreement of flocked swab sampling with the other methods, we used κ statistics to compare the test results from flocked swabs with those from sentinel feces, exhaust debris, and colony animal feces; we found excellent agreement between the colony feces and the flocked swab methods. The sterile flocked swab method detected all enzootic pathogens in the colonies tested. Results from flocked swab samples had the least agreement with sentinel feces, which also failed to detect the presence of fur mites. This study supports the use of sterile flocked swabs as alternative to using sentinel mice, thus conforming to the guiding principles of replacement and reduction in the use of animals for routine colony health monitoring.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50019,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science\",\"volume\":\"61 4\",\"pages\":\"370-380\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9674010/pdf/jaalas2022000370.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-22-000024\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/6/28 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30802/AALAS-JAALAS-22-000024","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

常规健康监测是 SPF 啮齿动物群落管理不可或缺的一部分。近年来,栅架级环境采样已被引入,作为哨点啮齿动物接触污秽垫料的辅助方法或替代方法。然而,架级环境监测与具有笼级过滤功能的啮齿动物饲养系统不兼容。本研究调查了无菌拭子接触脏垫料是否可以作为小鼠常规健康监测的替代采样方法,从而取代脏垫料笼中哨兵的使用。将成群的拭子放入笼子中,笼子里有脏垫料的混合样本,但没有小鼠;拭子在笼子里放置 90 天,每周搅拌一次,每两周拭擦一次笼子地板,以模拟哨兵小鼠对脏垫料的搅拌,便于收集灰尘颗粒。从群体小鼠和哨兵小鼠身上收集粪便样本。至于环境样本,则从排气管收集排气碎片,从排气管收集灰尘样本。所有样本均在第 88 天至第 91 天采集,并使用实时 PCR 检测法对多种病原体进行检测。为了确定植绒拭子采样与其他方法的诊断一致性,我们使用 κ 统计法比较了植绒拭子与哨兵粪便、排气碎片和群落动物粪便的检测结果;我们发现群落粪便与植绒拭子方法的检测结果非常一致。无菌羊群拭子法检测出了受测羊群中的所有流行性病原体。羊群拭子样本的结果与哨兵粪便的一致性最低,也未能检测到毛螨的存在。这项研究支持使用无菌羊群拭子来替代使用哨兵小鼠,从而符合替代和减少使用动物进行常规群落健康监测的指导原则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Using Sterile Flocked Swabs as an Alternative Method for Rodent Health Monitoring.

Routine health monitoring is an integral part of managing SPF rodent colonies. In recent years, rack-level environmental sampling has been introduced as an adjunct method or replacement for exposure of sentinel rodents to soiled bedding. However, rack-level environmental monitoring is not compatible with rodent housing systems that have cage-level filtration. The current study investigated whether exposure of sterile flocked swabs to soiled bedding can be an alternative sampling method for routine health monitoring in mice, thus replacing the use of sentinels in soiled-bedding cages. Flocked swabs were placed in cages containing pooled samples of soiled bedding but no mice; swabs remained there for 90 d, with weekly agitation and biweekly swabbing of the cage floor to mimic the agitation of soiled bedding by sentinel mice and facilitate the collection of dust particles. Fecal samples were collected from both colony and sentinel mice. For environmental samples, exhaust debris was collected from the rack plenum, and dust samples were collected from the exhaust hose. All samples were collected on days 88 through 91 and were tested for multiple pathogens by using real-time PCR assays. To determine the diagnostic agreement of flocked swab sampling with the other methods, we used κ statistics to compare the test results from flocked swabs with those from sentinel feces, exhaust debris, and colony animal feces; we found excellent agreement between the colony feces and the flocked swab methods. The sterile flocked swab method detected all enzootic pathogens in the colonies tested. Results from flocked swab samples had the least agreement with sentinel feces, which also failed to detect the presence of fur mites. This study supports the use of sterile flocked swabs as alternative to using sentinel mice, thus conforming to the guiding principles of replacement and reduction in the use of animals for routine colony health monitoring.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
35.30%
发文量
122
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (JAALAS) serves as an official communication vehicle for the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science (AALAS). The journal includes a section of refereed articles and a section of AALAS association news. All signed articles, including refereed articles and book reviews, editorials, committee reports, and news and commentary, reflect the individual views of the authors and are not official views of AALAS. The mission of the refereed section of the journal is to disseminate high-quality, peer-reviewed information on animal biology, technology, facility operations, management, and compliance as relevant to the AALAS membership. JAALAS accepts research reports (data-based) or scholarly reports (literature-based), with the caveat that all articles, including solicited manuscripts, must include appropriate references and must undergo peer review.
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Intranasal Administration of Polymeric Biodegradable Films in C57bl/6 Mice. Comparison of Systemic Extended-release Buprenorphine and Local Extended-release Bupivacaine-Meloxicam as Analgesics for Laparotomy in Mice. Equipment and Methods for Concurrently Housing Germfree and Gnotobiotic Mice in the Same Room. Evaluation of Rodent Diet Stability when Stored in Conditions that Diverge from Guide Parameters. Behavioral Evaluation of Laboratory-housed Ferrets (Mustela Putorius Furo) in Different Enclosure Sizes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1