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:

Who’s responsible for the llama drama?

Lab Animal volume 48, pages 35–36 (2019)Cite this article

This scenario addresses IACUC oversight and responsibilities as they pertain to agricultural animal research. After a llama is noted to have an untreated generalized skin infection during the AAALAC site visit of the schools of medicine and veterinary medicine at Great Eastern University (GEU), the site visitors recommended the schools receive a mandatory notice “indicating the need for more thorough animal monitoring and veterinary oversight.” The IACUC responded that since the llamas are part of a research study aimed at improving the reproductive efficiency of dairy cows, this research would not fall under its purview but that they would inform the College of Agriculture, whose research committee approved the work, and the PI of the need for veterinary care. Despite their assertion that research on and for the benefit of agricultural animals does not fall under the jurisdiction of the IACUC, their response to AAALAC’s mandatory notice could have been more robust.

Assuming that GEU holds a PHS Assurance, OLAW encourages institutions to perform program oversight institution-wide using uniform and consistent standards for animal care and use regardless of funding source1. PHS Policy requires adherence to the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (Guide) which “...applies to agricultural animals...including those maintained in typical farm settings2.” The Guide affirms that the species involved in research does not affect the fundamental roles and responsibilities of the institutional entities charged with regulatory oversight and gives IACUCs flexibility to categorize “research uses of agricultural animals and define standards for their care and use...based on both the researcher’s goals and concerns for animal well-being3.” As such, GEU’s IACUC has jurisdiction over these animals despite this being agricultural research. In this case, the IACUC could ensure appropriate oversight by requesting that Dr. Zymansky provide documentation to the IACUC administrator and the Attending Veterinarian (AV) detailing the study goals, procedures (e.g. frequency of blood collection), and the qualified personnel providing the daily husbandry and veterinary care. Ideally, this information can be captured in a protocol and the IACUC can decide whether the protocol will adhere to the standards outlined in the Guide or the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching (Ag Guide). In either case, veterinary care of these animals should be specifically outlined in their AAALAC Program Description. If the decision is made to adhere to the performance standards of the Ag Guide, then the IACUC will need to ensure that it is properly constituted and may need to add a member with agricultural animal experience.

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. Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, National Institutes of Health. Frequently Asked Questions. Applicability of the PHS Policy. #1. Should institutions apply the PHS Policy to all animal activities regardless of the source of funding? https://olaw.nih.gov/guidance/faqs#A

  2. Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, National Institutes of Health. Public Health Service Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. (US Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland, USA, 2015).

    Google Scholar 

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

  4. Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS). Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching. 3rd edn. (Federation of Animal Science Societies, Champaign, IL, 2010).

  5. American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine. Position Statement on Adequate Veterinary Care. https://www.aclam.org/about/position-statements

  6. AAALAC International. Frequently Asked Questions. Animals Included in the AAALAC International Accredited “Unit”. #1. Ownership. https://www.aaalac.org/accreditation/faq_landing.cfm#A1

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Ines Rodriguez, Samantha C. Conolly & Jennifer N. Davis

Authors
  1. Ines Rodriguez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samantha C. Conolly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer N. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer N. Davis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rodriguez, I., Conolly, S.C. & Davis, J.N. Who’s responsible for the llama drama?. Lab Anim 48, 35–36 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41684-018-0222-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41684-018-0222-5

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