Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
are modified from time to time, and some countries do not
have any regulations. In Europe, the Council of Europe is in
the process of reviewing and ratifying animal care guide-
lines and regulations (
European Parliament, 2009
). In the
USA, the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory
Animals, was recently revised (
National Research Council
(Institute for Laboratory Animal Research), 2011
), hereafter
referenced as the “2011 Guide.” Both of these documents
specify an increasing emphasis on social housing of social
primate species. Although this chapter primarily focuses on
the situation in the USA, the content is relevant to selecting
laboratory primate housing around the globe. Primate
facility managers must be familiar with the laws and regu-
lations of the relevant countries, and be cognizant that they
change periodically. Beyond legal requirements, it is
imperative that new housing selections be based on the most
current information pertaining to animal welfare perspec-
tives. For those countries lacking specific standards
regarding minimum standards for nonhuman primate
housing, the 2011 Guide is the standard used by the Asso-
ciation for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory
Animal Care (AAALAC International) to assess units that
are accredited or seeking accreditation (
http://www.aaalac.
org/accreditation/rules.cfm
).
increase in tension behaviors (
Kaufman et al., 2004
). There
is general agreement, however, that appropriate cage sizes
should accommodate suitable environmental enrichment,
species differences in normal behavior, age, number of
animals (if socially housed), and research goals (
Buchanan-
Smith et al., 2004; Rennie and Buchanan-Smith, 2006
;
International Primatological
Society, 2007
;
Jennings et al.,
2009
;
National Research Council (Institute for Laboratory
Animal Research), 2011
).
Cage size regulatory standards are being changed in
some countries and some countries are developing regula-
tory standards where none existed before. Current regula-
tions and guidelines applicable to specific countries or
jurisdictions should be consulted when considering
purchasing, designing, or manufacturing of cages. Addi-
tionally, cage size regulatory standards may apply to
minimum size requirements for a single animal or a mother
and nursing infant as exemplified by regulations and
guidelines employed in the USA (
US Department of
Agriculture, 1991
;
National Research Council (Institute for
Laboratory Animal Research), 2011
), Canada (
Canadian
Council on Animal Care, 1993
), and Singapore (
National
Advisory Committee for Laboratory Animal Research
(NACLAR), 2004
), or as paired or grouped animals as
exemplified by European Union guidelines (
European
Parliament, 2009
). In all cases, these standards should be
considered as minimum requirements, and discretion and
professional judgment should be employed in the selection
of cage sizes. Regulations and guidelines in the USA and
other countries further specify that cages should allow
animals to make normal postural adjustments and allow for
the animals' normal conformation, proportions, locomotor
patterns, and growth. For example, the 2011 Guide
recommends that cage height should be sufficient for all
animals to comfortably stand erect and that longer-legged
or long-tailed species may require more height than other
species; for brachiating species, the cage height should
accommodate and enhance brachiating movement. Addi-
tionally, the 2011 Guide indicates that the cage volume and
linear perch space should consider requirements of
neotropical and arboreal species. Currently, there is
a substantial difference in the minimum cage sizes speci-
fied by the 2011 Guide compared to the proposed European
Union cage sizes to take effect by 2017. For example, an
adult female Macaca mulatta (below 10 kg) would require
a minimum cage floor area of 4.3 ft
2
(0.4 m
2
)w th
a minimum cage height of 30 in (76.2 cm) according to the
2011 Guide and US regulations (
US Department of Agri-
culture, 1991
) or a minimum cage volume of 10.7 ft
3
(0.30 m
3
). The same animal would require a minimum floor
space of 21.5 ft
2
(2.0 m
2
) with a minimum cage height of
70.9 in (180.1 cm) and a minimum cage volume of 127 ft
3
(3.6 m
3
) according to the European Union (
European
Parliament, 2009
). Cage design should also consider the
Cage Size
Cage size (floor area and enclosure height) is easily regu-
lated because dimensions are easily measured engineering
standards. However, cage size minimums are rather arbi-
trary and vary from country to country (
Reinhardt et al.,
1996; Buchanan-Smith et al., 2004; International Prima-
tological Society, 2007
). The US government established
minimum standards for cage sizes for nonhuman primates
(
US Department of Agriculture, 1991
). These standards
were initially published as recommended guidelines by the
National Institutes of Health in 1985 (
US Public Health
Service, 1985
) and later adopted as regulatory standards by
the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).
These guidelines, originally developed to be applied using
“professional judgment,” were transformed into rigid
engineering standards (
Crockett, 1993
). Subsequently,
detailed studies of the effects of varying cage size, within
the range of US mandated cage sizes, found no significant
effects on abnormal or normal behavior or urinary cortisol
levels in singly housed adult Macaca fascicularis and
M. nemestrina (
Crockett et al., 1993, 1995, 2000
).
However, Buchanan-Smith, et al. (2004) questioned the
relevance of these studies because the cage sizes investi-
gated were smaller than those considered legal in the UK. A
more recent study of M. mulatta in considerably larger cage
sizes than the US minimums also found no increase in
abnormal behavior when the animals were returned to the
smaller of the cage sizes studied, although there was some
