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:

Foul Experiences

Lab Animal volume 52, pages 262–263 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Dr. Thomas Lauke’s NSF funded grant involves work with guinea fowl, a species native to Africa and considered poultry by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)1. All animal activities conducted under this grant are subject to the provisions of the PHS Policy2, and the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (The Guide)3. Since the birds were bred in captivity and used for research, the USDA Bird Rule4 does not apply.

Dr. Lauke has requested an increase in animal numbers from the Great Eastern University (GEU)’s IACUC due to a failure to recapture all the animals and to collect data. There are critical issues that GEU’s IACUC needs to consider during the review. First, were the birds allowed to acclimatize to the local environment before being released? Second, how are the guinea fowl contained in the study area? Are they protected from depredation, diseases, and adverse weather conditions? Is shelter provided? Are they on GEU property, public (federal, state, local), or private property? How easily can the researchers access the area to observe the birds? Third, are the birds checked according to the Guide; if not, what is the frequency and why? How is routine monitoring of the birds accomplished? Any technological issue affecting tracking of the birds needs to be addressed. Fourth, keets tend to have low survival rates in the wild. Was this a factor in the failure to capture that the Principal Investigator did not envisage? Is it possible that some keets did not survive, and therefore could not be caught? Regardless, the cause of any losses needs to be resolved. Fifth, guinea fowl while considered poultry1, are a non-native species. Were other federal, state, and local government agencies contacted to confirm that guinea fowl can be released into a potentially non-confined area? Are all required permits in place? Sixth, why was the investigator unable to recapture the guinea fowl? Did the team have the necessary skills to accomplish the task? How can the capture of these birds be improved without compromising their welfare? Seventh, the IACUC needs to revisit the chip implantation procedure to make sure there is no adverse impact on the keets and that they recover from it properly. Eighth, the IACUC must address the final disposition of the birds. What will happen to the birds when Lauke has completed the study? Final disposition was not mentioned in the scenario.

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. USDA, Live Poultry https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal-and-animal-product-import-information/live-animal-imports/sa_avian/importing-live-poultry/ct_live_poultry

  2. Public Health Service. PHS Policy on the Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. (U.S. Department of health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, 2015.) NIH Publication No. 15-8013.

  3. Institute for Laboratory Animal Research. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. 8th edn. (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2011.).

  4. Federal Register. Standards for Birds Not Bred for Use in Research Under the Animal Welfare Act. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/02/21/2023-03357/standards-for-birds-not-bred-for-use-in-research-under-the-animal-welfare-act

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Laboratory Animal Resources (LAR), Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Marissa Pollak, Samantha Thomas, Jassia Pang & James Owiny

  2. Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Pathology (MIP), Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Marissa Pollak, Samantha Thomas & James Owiny

Authors
  1. Marissa Pollak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samantha Thomas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jassia Pang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. James Owiny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James Owiny.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pollak, M., Thomas, S., Pang, J. et al. Foul Experiences. Lab Anim 52, 262–263 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41684-023-01272-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41684-023-01272-4

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