| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Hoglund, AU, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of individually ventilated cage systems for laboratory rodents: cage environment and animal health aspects
- 2001
-
Ingår i: Laboratory animals. - : SAGE Publications. - 0023-6772 .- 1758-1117. ; 35:1, s. 51-57
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The use of individually ventilated cage (IVC) systems has become an attractive housing regime of laboratory rodents. The benefits of IVC systems are, reportedly, a high degree of containment combined with relative ease of handling, and a high degree of protection from allergenes. In the present study we tested whether two IVC systems (BioZone VentiRack, IVC1 and Techniplast SealSafe, IVC2S), in which we held mature male NMRI mice, were constructed to maintain a constant differential pressure, positive or negative, during a prolonged period of time. We also measured ammonia (NH3) concentrations after about 2 weeks of use, and CO2 build-up during a 60 min simulated power failure situation. In addition, animal weight development and bite-wound frequency were recorded (Renström et al. 2000). From the present study it is concluded that the IVC1 air handling system provides a more uniform and balanced differential pressure than the IVC2S. Both systems effectively scavenge NH3 when bedding material is not soaked by urine. Although the IVCs are dependent on the continual function of the fans to work properly, it seems unlikely that CO2 concentrations increase to hazardous levels, as a result of a one hour power failure, with the type of cages used in this study. Differences in weight development and bite-wound occurrence were noted between the two IVC systems. Causes for these differences could not be established and need more investigation.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Renstrom, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of individually ventilated cage systems for laboratory rodents: occupational health aspects
- 2001
-
Ingår i: Laboratory animals. - : SAGE Publications. - 0023-6772 .- 1758-1117. ; 35:1, s. 42-50
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- New ventilated caging systems for laboratory animals were compared with conventional caging regarding allergen distribution, ergonomic suitability, cage environment and animal welfare. This paper presents occupational health evaluations. Mice were placed in individually ventilated cage (IVC) systems, a ventilated cabinet, and in cages on open shelves (conventional husbandry). The IVC systems were studied at negative and positive airflow. Aeroallergens were sampled on filters ( n = 204, including controls) in undisturbed rooms and during cage changing. Concentrations of mouse urinary allergen (Mus m 1) in filter eluates were measured using sandwich ELISA. An ergonomic evaluation was performed with measurement of traction forces. Staff exposure during cage changing was high in all systems, range 116-4430 ng Mus m 1/m3. In undisturbed animal rooms, allergen levels were orders of magnitude higher when using conventional caging compared with ventilated systems; P < 0.001. At positive pressure, both IVCs leaked allergen (median Mus m 1 concentration was < 0.08 ng/m3 at negative, but 6.5 ng/m3 (IVC1) and 0.8 ng/m3 (IVC2S) at positive pressure). The IVC systems had ergonomic disadvantages compared with the conventional husbandry and the ventilated cabinet, for instance with cages in unsuitable working heights. Ventilated husbandry solutions reduce levels of airborne allergen substantially at negative pressure, but are ergonomically less suitable. To prevent allergen exposure during cage changing, we propose that this procedure should be performed under ventilated conditions. Producers and users must cooperate in optimizing animal caging systems for both animals and staff.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
