Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Protocol Review
  • Published:

Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Verify congruence

Lab Animal volume 44, pages 130–131 (2015)Cite this article

The scenario for White and Green raises several questions regarding the use of animals in their respective research. White has effectively increased the number of nonhuman primates (NHPs) used for her research without notifying the IACUC, and Green has changed the scope of his research grant without notifying the funding agency. White and Green both state that they were not using live monkeys and seem to lack understanding of the regulations and the terms and conditions under which they are obligated to carry out their research.

The Animal Welfare Act definition of animal includes “any live or dead” monkey that is “being used, or is intended for use, for research”1. The Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare has published a similar interpretation, stating that the Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals applies in cases where animals are killed “for the purpose of obtaining or using their tissues or other materials”2. In addition, the terms and conditions applied to National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding awards require prior notification for “all instances” of a change in research scope, which includes a change in animal model3, and the institution “must be able to associate each grant or grants with a relevant protocol or protocols”4.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Animal Welfare Act Regulations. 9 CFR.

  2. National Institutes of Health. Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals—Frequently Asked Questions (US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, 2006, revised 2014).

  3. US National Institutes of Health. NIH Grants Policy Statement; Part II Terms and Conditions of NIH Grant Awards, Subpart A: General. §8.1.2.5. (US National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 2013).

  4. Brown, P. Grants Policy and Congruence. OLAW Online Seminar (7 June 2012). http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/120607_seminar_transcript.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Reynolds is Regulatory Compliance Specialist and Smalls is Grants Manager, Allen Institute, Seattle, WA.,

    Shannon Reynolds &  Lea Smalls

Authors
  1. Shannon Reynolds
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lea Smalls
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reynolds, S., Smalls, L. Response to Protocol Review Scenario: Verify congruence. Lab Anim 44, 130–131 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.729

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/laban.729

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing