Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
4.2
3.0
Journals
Animals
Special Issues
Euthanasia of Animals
share announcement

Euthanasia of Animals

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Animal Welfare".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 December 2021) | Viewed by 26657

Special Issue Editors

Dr. Patricia V. Turner

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Department of Pathobiology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON N1G 2W1, Canada
Interests: diseases of laboratory animals; toxicologic pathology; research animal anesthesia; analgesia; euthanasia; animal welfare
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals
Dr. Debra Hickman

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Laboratory Animal Resource Center, School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA
Interests: animal welfare; mouse; rat; psychophysiology; affective states; laboratory animal
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

The humane killing of animals is a major animal welfare concern worldwide, regardless of the animal species. Euthanasia of research animals reaching humane endpoints or individual sick, injured or frail companion and farm animals is routinely practiced by veterinarians and others, depending on the context. Humane methods for killing animals imply minimal pain and distress prior to and during the procedure and a rapid loss of sensibility prior to death.

However, additional factors such as human safety, practicality, and the aesthetic and emotional effects on the people performing the method often constrain the techniques that can and should be used. There is increasing interest in ensuring that the methods used for humanely killing animals be evaluated scientifically. Although there is a substantial body of research on methods for humane stunning and killing for slaughter, scientific assessment of different on-farm killing methods on the welfare of farm animals has really only emerged over the last decade. Similarly, a large body of work has examined euthanasia of laboratory animals, but research approaches have sometimes lacked consistency and robust experimental design. Studies are just beginning to emerge on issues such as compassion fatigue and mental health issues associated with repeated euthanasia of animals in research, clinical, and farm settings. Practical animal-based measures that can be used to reliably assess loss of sensibility and confirm death are being validated objectively and included in training programs for farm and shelter workers. Research to date indicates considerable species, sex, and age differences in animal responses to different killing methods, and there is an ongoing need for research in this area.

We invite original research papers that address methods for on-farm killing and euthanasia of livestock, farmed fish, animals raised commercially for pelt production and poultry, as well as methods and issues related to euthanasia of research and companion animals in shelters and in clinical settings. Topics can include assessment and comparisons of methods for euthanasia of individual or small numbers of animals and killing of whole groups, colonies, herds, flocks or cohorts of stock for disease purposes, public health emergencies or other depopulation needs. Additional topics include validation of animal-based measures that can be used to practically assess loss of sensibility and time to death, and aesthetic and emotional effects of different killing methods on farm, shelter, and research workers as well as veterinary professionals and the public.

Dr. Patricia V. Turner
Dr. Debra Hickman
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • animals
  • on-farm killing
  • depopulation
  • livestock
  • poultry
  • fish
  • fur-bearing
  • laboratory, companion, Euthanasia
  • welfare

Published Papers (7 papers)

Download All Papers
Order results
Result details
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review, Other

16 pages, 1501 KiB  
Article
Voluntary Oral Ingestion of a Sedative Prior to Euthanasia with CO2: Behavioural Responses of Mice
by Raquel Rodriguez-Sanchez, Elyssa Barnaby, Lucia Améndola, Shen-Yan Hea, Bobby Smith, James Webster and Gosia Zobel
Animals 2021, 11(10), 2879; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ani11102879 - 01 Oct 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2419
Abstract
Laboratory mice are commonly euthanised with carbon dioxide (CO2); however, there is ample evidence that this gas is aversive. Previous work suggests that sedation achieved via injection with benzodiazepines prior to CO2 administration could reduce aversive behaviours during euthanasia. We [...] Read more.
Laboratory mice are commonly euthanised with carbon dioxide (CO2); however, there is ample evidence that this gas is aversive. Previous work suggests that sedation achieved via injection with benzodiazepines prior to CO2 administration could reduce aversive behaviours during euthanasia. We explored the potential of using a voluntarily ingested sedative (tiletamine-zolazepam, Zoletil®) prior to euthanasia. Male and female C57BL/6 mice were allocated into one of the five experimental groups, which differed in the dose of Zoletil: 0, 10, 20, 40, 80 or 100 mg/kg. A dose of 20 mg/kg was found to achieve mild sedation prior to euthanasia; mice which received this dose numerically reared and walked on the cage lid less, and showed ataxia, immobility and recumbency for longer than mice that received a lower dose. During euthanasia, mice that received 20 mg/kg showed fewer aversive responses to CO2. Doses of 40 to 100 mg/kg were associated with signs of moderate to severe sedation, but resulted in an incomplete intake of the sedative, which made the interpretation of the aversiveness to CO2 difficult. Voluntary oral administration of a sedative is an effective, affordable, and easy way to minimize the stress of mice to euthanasia with CO2. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Euthanasia of Animals)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 525 KiB  
Article
Practical Euthanasia Method for Common Sea Stars (Asterias rubens) That Allows for High-Quality RNA Sampling
by Sarah J. Wahltinez, Kevin J. Kroll, Elizabeth A. Nunamaker, Nancy D. Denslow and Nicole I. Stacy
Animals 2021, 11(7), 1847; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ani11071847 - 22 Jun 2021
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2881
Abstract
Sea stars in research are often lethally sampled without available methodology to render them insensible prior to sampling due to concerns over sufficient sample quality for applied molecular techniques. The objectives of this study were to describe an inexpensive and effective two-step euthanasia [...] Read more.
Sea stars in research are often lethally sampled without available methodology to render them insensible prior to sampling due to concerns over sufficient sample quality for applied molecular techniques. The objectives of this study were to describe an inexpensive and effective two-step euthanasia method for adult common sea stars (Asterias rubens) and to demonstrate that high-quality RNA samples for further use in downstream molecular analyses can be obtained from pyloric ceca of MgCl2-immersed sea stars. Adult common sea stars (n = 15) were immersed in a 75 g/L magnesium chloride solution until they were no longer reactive to having their oral surface tapped with forceps (mean: 4 min, range 2–7 min), left immersed for an additional minute, and then sampled with sharp scissors. RNA from pyloric ceca (n = 10) was isolated using a liquid–liquid method, then samples were treated with DNase and analyzed for evaluation of RNA integrity number (RIN) for assessment of the quantity and purity of intact RNA. Aversive reactions to magnesium chloride solution were not observed and no sea stars regained spontaneous movement or reacted to sampling. The calculated RIN ranged from 7.3–9.8, demonstrating that the combination of animal welfare via the use of anesthesia and sampling for advanced molecular techniques is possible using this low-cost technique. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Euthanasia of Animals)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 827 KiB  
Article
Evaluation of Euthanasia Methods on Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Newly Hatched Male Layer Chicks
by Xi Wang, Dan Zhao, Allison C. Milby, Gregory S. Archer, E. David Peebles, Shailesh Gurung and Morgan B. Farnell
Animals 2021, 11(6), 1802; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ani11061802 - 17 Jun 2021
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 2837
Abstract
Newly hatched male layer chicks are considered as “by-products” in the egg industry and must be humanely euthanized at the hatchery. Instantaneous mechanical destruction (maceration) is the predominant euthanasia method applied in poultry hatcheries and is approved by the American Veterinary Medical Association [...] Read more.
Newly hatched male layer chicks are considered as “by-products” in the egg industry and must be humanely euthanized at the hatchery. Instantaneous mechanical destruction (maceration) is the predominant euthanasia method applied in poultry hatcheries and is approved by the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA). However, maceration is not perceived by the public to be a humane means of euthanasia. The effects of alternative euthanasia methods, including carbon dioxide (CO2) or nitrogen (N2) inhalation, and a commercial negative pressure stunning system on behavioral and physiological responses of day-of-hatch male layer chicks, were evaluated in a field trial. Chick behaviors, including ataxia, loss of posture, convulsions, cessation of vocalization, and cessation of movement, were monitored. Serum hormones were assessed at the end of each of the alternative euthanasia treatments, including a control group allowed to breathe normal atmospheric air. The N2 method induced unconsciousness and death later than the CO2 and negative pressure methods, and increased serum corticosterone concentrations of neonatal chicks. Carbon dioxide inhalation increased serotonin concentrations as compared to controls, as well as the N2 and the negative pressure methods. The behavioral and physical responses observed in this study suggest that both CO2 inhalation and negative pressure stunning can be employed to humanely euthanize neonatal male layer chicks. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Euthanasia of Animals)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 244 KiB  
Article
Deathly Silent: Exploring the Global Lack of Data Relating to Stranded Cetacean Euthanasia
by Rebecca M. Boys, Ngaio J. Beausoleil, Emma L. Betty and Karen A. Stockin
Animals 2021, 11(5), 1460; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ani11051460 - 19 May 2021
Cited by 5 | Viewed by 4431
Abstract
The compromised state of stranded cetaceans means that euthanasia is often required. However, current knowledge and implementation of euthanasia methods remain highly variable, with limited data on the practicalities and welfare impacts of procedures. This study evaluated the available published data on cetacean [...] Read more.
The compromised state of stranded cetaceans means that euthanasia is often required. However, current knowledge and implementation of euthanasia methods remain highly variable, with limited data on the practicalities and welfare impacts of procedures. This study evaluated the available published data on cetacean euthanasia, highlighting knowledge gaps and providing direction to improve stranded cetacean welfare. A total of 2147 peer-reviewed articles describing marine mammal euthanasia were examined. Of these 3.1% provided details on the method used, with 91% employing chemical methods. Two countries, the United Kingdom (UK) and New Zealand (NZ), provided euthanasia reports to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) between 2007 and 2020. Methods employed were reported for 78.3% and 100% of individual cetaceans euthanised in the UK and NZ, respectively. In the UK, chemical euthanasia was most common (52%), whilst in NZ only ballistics methods were used. Few data were available about time to death/insensibility (TTD); 0.5% of peer-reviewed articles provided TTD, whilst TTD was reported for 35% of individuals in the UK and for 98% in NZ. However, IWC reports lacked detail on how death/insensibility were assessed, with multiple individuals “presumed instantly” killed. Overall, the findings highlight the lack of available information on cetacean euthanasia, and suggest increased data collection and the application of appropriate methods to improve welfare. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Euthanasia of Animals)
11 pages, 2098 KiB  
Article
Aversion to Desflurane and Isoflurane in Sprague-Dawley Rats (Rattus norvegicus)
by Katrina Frost, Maaria Shah, Vivian S.Y. Leung and Daniel S.J. Pang
Animals 2020, 10(6), 950; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ani10060950 - 30 May 2020
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2601
Abstract
Carbon dioxide and isoflurane are widely used for killing rats, yet may not truly achieve “euthanasia”, because they elicit aversion. The inhalant anesthetic desflurane is faster acting than isoflurane, representing a potential refinement. Using an aversion-avoidance paradigm, 24 rats were exposed to isoflurane [...] Read more.
Carbon dioxide and isoflurane are widely used for killing rats, yet may not truly achieve “euthanasia”, because they elicit aversion. The inhalant anesthetic desflurane is faster acting than isoflurane, representing a potential refinement. Using an aversion-avoidance paradigm, 24 rats were exposed to isoflurane or desflurane (n = 12 per group) at initial exposure. Fourteen rats were then re-exposed to isoflurane or desflurane (n = 7 per group), after a 7 days washout period. Initial exposure: time to recumbency was faster for desflurane than isoflurane (p = 0.0008, 95% CI [-12.9 to 32.6 s]), with 9/12 and 6/12 rats becoming recumbent, respectively. At initial exposure, there was no difference between groups in time to withdrawal (p = 0.714). At re-exposure, all rats withdrew and no rats became recumbent. Time to withdrawal at re-exposure did not differ between treatment groups (p = 0.083). Compared to initial exposure, time to withdrawal during re-exposure was similar for isoflurane (p = 0.228) and faster with desflurane (p = 0.012, 95% CI [19.1 to 49.5 s]). Isoflurane and desflurane are similarly aversive, with aversion increasing at re-exposure. The shorter time from exposure to recumbency with desflurane indicates that any distress is of a shorter duration when compared with isoflurane. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Euthanasia of Animals)
►▼ Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Review

Jump to: Research, Other

19 pages, 833 KiB  
Review
A Systematic Literature Review on Depopulation Methods for Swine
by Andréia G. Arruda, Tariku J. Beyene, Justin Kieffer, Joshua N. Lorbach, Steven Moeller and Andrew S. Bowman
Animals 2020, 10(11), 2161; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ani10112161 - 20 Nov 2020
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 4470
Abstract
Swine mass depopulation refers to the destruction of large numbers of pigs and may include not only animals affected with a disease but also healthy pigs in a facility or surrounding areas. Emerging applications of mass depopulation include reducing welfare issues associated with [...] Read more.
Swine mass depopulation refers to the destruction of large numbers of pigs and may include not only animals affected with a disease but also healthy pigs in a facility or surrounding areas. Emerging applications of mass depopulation include reducing welfare issues associated with slaughter delays, which was observed in the United States in 2020 as a result of the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. The objectives of this review were to summarize the available literature on swine depopulation methods and to highlight critical gaps in knowledge. Peer-reviewed articles were identified through a systematic search in electronic databases including Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed. A total of 68 publications were assessed. Gaseous carbon dioxide inhalation was the most commonly reported depopulation method for both small- and large-scale trials. Measurements of consciousness state, which serves to assess suffering and humaneness, appeared to be lacking in a high proportion of the studies. None of the published studies demonstrated an ideally reliable and safe way to induce rapid unconsciousness in large groups of pigs. Development of rapid mass depopulation methods applicable to large groups of pigs is necessary to provide industry partners with suitable and low-cost emergency preparedness procedures while adhering to personnel safety and animal welfare standards. Lastly, there is an urgent need to standardize comprehensive reporting guidelines for depopulation studies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Euthanasia of Animals)
►▼ Show Figures

Figure 1

Other

Jump to: Research, Review

8 pages, 192 KiB  
Commentary
Lessons and Recommendations from a Pentobarbital Shortage: US and Canada 2021
by Kathleen Cooney and Lianna Titcombe
Animals 2022, 12(3), 365; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/ani12030365 - 02 Feb 2022
Cited by 4 | Viewed by 4944
Abstract
In 2021, a shortage in the supply of the euthanasia drug pentobarbital sodium affected animal care professionals around the world, including in the United States and Canada. Pentobarbital sodium is the drug of choice for companion animal euthanasia in both countries. The decreased [...] Read more.
In 2021, a shortage in the supply of the euthanasia drug pentobarbital sodium affected animal care professionals around the world, including in the United States and Canada. Pentobarbital sodium is the drug of choice for companion animal euthanasia in both countries. The decreased availability of pentobarbital sodium affected a number of animal care industries, forcing conservation of the drug and the use of alternative methods and other agents to facilitate humane death for all manner of animal species. Veterinary medical groups, laboratory research institutions, and the animal sheltering industry worked together to identify the best path forward to maintain routine euthanasia practices and to protect the welfare of animals. This article aims to explore the reasons behind the shortage and to highlight the necessary responses and adjustments made in order to continue providing euthanasia services in North America. Recommendations for handling future pentobarbital shortages are included. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Euthanasia of Animals)
Show export options expand_more Show export options expand_less
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
 
Displaying articles 1-7
Back to TopTop