Prospective severity classification of scientific procedures in cephalopods: Report of a COST FA1301 Working Group survey

Gavan M. Cooke; David B. Anderson; Marie-Laure Begout; Ngaire Dennison; Daniel Osorio; Belinda Tonkins; Tore Kristiansen; Graziano Fiorito; Viola Galligioni; Giovanna Ponte; Paul L. R. Andrews

doi:10.1177/0023677219864626

Prospective severity classification of scientific procedures in cephalopods: Report of a COST FA1301 Working Group survey

Gavan M. Cooke (Lead / Corresponding author), David B. Anderson, Marie-Laure Begout, Ngaire Dennison, Daniel Osorio, Belinda Tonkins, Tore Kristiansen, Graziano Fiorito, Viola Galligioni, Giovanna Ponte, Paul L. R. Andrews

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

10 Citations (Scopus)

23 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Cephalopods are the first invertebrate class regulated by the European Union (EU) under Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, which requires prospective assessment of severity of procedures. To assist the scientific community in establishing severity classification for cephalopods, we undertook a web-based survey of the EU cephalopod research community as represented by the participants in the European COoperation on Science and Technology (COST) Action FA1301, CephsInAction'. The survey consisted of 50 scenarios covering a range of procedures involving several cephalopod species at different life stages. Respondents (59 people from 15 countries) either allocated a severity classification to each scenario or indicated that they were unable to decide (UTD). Analyses evaluated score distributions and clustering. Overall, the UTD scores were low (7.0 ± 0.6%) and did not affect the severity classification. Procedures involving paralarvae and killing methods (not specified in Annexe IV) had the highest UTD scores. Consensus on non-recovery procedures was reached consistently, although occasionally non-recovery appeared to be confused with killing methods. Scenarios describing procedures above the lower threshold for regulation, including those describing behavioural studies, were also identified and allocated throughout the full range of severity classifications. Severity classification for scenarios based on different species (e.g. cuttlefish vs. octopus) was consistent, comparable and dependent on potentially more harmful interventions. We found no marked or statistically significant differences in the overall scoring of scenarios between the demographic subgroups (age, sex, PhD and cephalopod experience). The COST Action FA1301 survey data provide a basis for a prospective severity classification for cephalopods to serve as guide for researchers, project assessors and regulators.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	541-563
Number of pages	23
Journal	Laboratory Animals
Volume	53
Issue number	6
Early online date	31 Aug 2019
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/0023677219864626
Publication status	Published - Dec 2019

Keywords

3Rs
63
Cephalopods
Directive 2010
EU
invertebrates
severity classification
Directive 2010/63/EU
cephalopods

ASJC Scopus subject areas

General Veterinary
Animal Science and Zoology

Access to Document

10.1177/0023677219864626

Author Accepted Manuscript
Cooke, G.M. et al. "Prospective severity classification of scientific procedures in cephalopods: Report of a COST FA1301 Working Group survey", Laboratory Animals (2019). Copyright © 2019 (The Authors). Reprinted by permission of SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0023677219864626
Accepted author manuscript, 220 KB

Cite this

@article{18679758a30040fba661149277b8dba9,

title = "Prospective severity classification of scientific procedures in cephalopods: Report of a COST FA1301 Working Group survey",

abstract = "Cephalopods are the first invertebrate class regulated by the European Union (EU) under Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, which requires prospective assessment of severity of procedures. To assist the scientific community in establishing severity classification for cephalopods, we undertook a web-based survey of the EU cephalopod research community as represented by the participants in the European COoperation on Science and Technology (COST) Action FA1301, CephsInAction'. The survey consisted of 50 scenarios covering a range of procedures involving several cephalopod species at different life stages. Respondents (59 people from 15 countries) either allocated a severity classification to each scenario or indicated that they were unable to decide (UTD). Analyses evaluated score distributions and clustering. Overall, the UTD scores were low (7.0 ± 0.6%) and did not affect the severity classification. Procedures involving paralarvae and killing methods (not specified in Annexe IV) had the highest UTD scores. Consensus on non-recovery procedures was reached consistently, although occasionally non-recovery appeared to be confused with killing methods. Scenarios describing procedures above the lower threshold for regulation, including those describing behavioural studies, were also identified and allocated throughout the full range of severity classifications. Severity classification for scenarios based on different species (e.g. cuttlefish vs. octopus) was consistent, comparable and dependent on potentially more harmful interventions. We found no marked or statistically significant differences in the overall scoring of scenarios between the demographic subgroups (age, sex, PhD and cephalopod experience). The COST Action FA1301 survey data provide a basis for a prospective severity classification for cephalopods to serve as guide for researchers, project assessors and regulators.",

keywords = "3Rs, 63, Cephalopods, Directive 2010, EU, invertebrates, severity classification, Directive 2010/63/EU, cephalopods",

author = "Cooke, {Gavan M.} and Anderson, {David B.} and Marie-Laure Begout and Ngaire Dennison and Daniel Osorio and Belinda Tonkins and Tore Kristiansen and Graziano Fiorito and Viola Galligioni and Giovanna Ponte and Andrews, {Paul L. R.}",

year = "2019",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1177/0023677219864626",

language = "English",

volume = "53",

pages = "541--563",

journal = "Laboratory Animals",

issn = "0023-6772",

publisher = "SAGE Publications",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Prospective severity classification of scientific procedures in cephalopods

T2 - Report of a COST FA1301 Working Group survey

AU - Cooke, Gavan M.

AU - Anderson, David B.

AU - Begout, Marie-Laure

AU - Dennison, Ngaire

AU - Osorio, Daniel

AU - Tonkins, Belinda

AU - Kristiansen, Tore

AU - Fiorito, Graziano

AU - Galligioni, Viola

AU - Ponte, Giovanna

AU - Andrews, Paul L. R.

PY - 2019/12

Y1 - 2019/12

N2 - Cephalopods are the first invertebrate class regulated by the European Union (EU) under Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, which requires prospective assessment of severity of procedures. To assist the scientific community in establishing severity classification for cephalopods, we undertook a web-based survey of the EU cephalopod research community as represented by the participants in the European COoperation on Science and Technology (COST) Action FA1301, CephsInAction'. The survey consisted of 50 scenarios covering a range of procedures involving several cephalopod species at different life stages. Respondents (59 people from 15 countries) either allocated a severity classification to each scenario or indicated that they were unable to decide (UTD). Analyses evaluated score distributions and clustering. Overall, the UTD scores were low (7.0 ± 0.6%) and did not affect the severity classification. Procedures involving paralarvae and killing methods (not specified in Annexe IV) had the highest UTD scores. Consensus on non-recovery procedures was reached consistently, although occasionally non-recovery appeared to be confused with killing methods. Scenarios describing procedures above the lower threshold for regulation, including those describing behavioural studies, were also identified and allocated throughout the full range of severity classifications. Severity classification for scenarios based on different species (e.g. cuttlefish vs. octopus) was consistent, comparable and dependent on potentially more harmful interventions. We found no marked or statistically significant differences in the overall scoring of scenarios between the demographic subgroups (age, sex, PhD and cephalopod experience). The COST Action FA1301 survey data provide a basis for a prospective severity classification for cephalopods to serve as guide for researchers, project assessors and regulators.

AB - Cephalopods are the first invertebrate class regulated by the European Union (EU) under Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, which requires prospective assessment of severity of procedures. To assist the scientific community in establishing severity classification for cephalopods, we undertook a web-based survey of the EU cephalopod research community as represented by the participants in the European COoperation on Science and Technology (COST) Action FA1301, CephsInAction'. The survey consisted of 50 scenarios covering a range of procedures involving several cephalopod species at different life stages. Respondents (59 people from 15 countries) either allocated a severity classification to each scenario or indicated that they were unable to decide (UTD). Analyses evaluated score distributions and clustering. Overall, the UTD scores were low (7.0 ± 0.6%) and did not affect the severity classification. Procedures involving paralarvae and killing methods (not specified in Annexe IV) had the highest UTD scores. Consensus on non-recovery procedures was reached consistently, although occasionally non-recovery appeared to be confused with killing methods. Scenarios describing procedures above the lower threshold for regulation, including those describing behavioural studies, were also identified and allocated throughout the full range of severity classifications. Severity classification for scenarios based on different species (e.g. cuttlefish vs. octopus) was consistent, comparable and dependent on potentially more harmful interventions. We found no marked or statistically significant differences in the overall scoring of scenarios between the demographic subgroups (age, sex, PhD and cephalopod experience). The COST Action FA1301 survey data provide a basis for a prospective severity classification for cephalopods to serve as guide for researchers, project assessors and regulators.

KW - 3Rs

KW - 63

KW - Cephalopods

KW - Directive 2010

KW - EU

KW - invertebrates

KW - severity classification

KW - Directive 2010/63/EU

KW - cephalopods

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074491237&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0023677219864626

DO - 10.1177/0023677219864626

M3 - Article

C2 - 31474182

SN - 0023-6772

VL - 53

SP - 541

EP - 563

JO - Laboratory Animals

JF - Laboratory Animals

IS - 6

ER -

Prospective severity classification of scientific procedures in cephalopods: Report of a COST FA1301 Working Group survey

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this