Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorScullion-Hall, Laura-
dc.contributor.authorRobinson, Sally-
dc.contributor.authorFinch, John-
dc.contributor.authorBuchanan-Smith, Hannah M-
dc.description.abstractWe have an ethical and scientific obligation to Refine all aspects of the life of the laboratory-housed dog. Across industry there are many differences amongst facilities, home pen design and husbandry, as well as differences in features of the dogs such as strain, sex and scientific protocols. Understanding how these influence welfare, and hence scientific output is therefore critical. A significant proportion of dogs’ lives are spent in the home pen and as such, the design can have a considerable impact on welfare. Although best practice guidelines exist, there is a paucity of empirical evidence to support the recommended Refinements and uptake varies across industry. In this study, we examine the effect of modern and traditional home pen design, overall facility design, husbandry, history of regulated procedures, strain and sex on welfare-indicating behaviours and mechanical pressure threshold. Six groups of dogs from two facilities (total n=46) were observed in the home pen and tested for mechanical pressure threshold. Dogs which were housed in a purpose-built modern facility or in a modern design home pen showed the fewest behavioural indicators of negative welfare (such as alert or pacing behaviours) and more indicators of positive welfare (such as resting) compared to those in a traditional home pen design or traditional facility. Welfare indicating behaviours did not vary consistently with strain, but male dogs showed more negative welfare indicating behaviours and had greater variation in these behaviours than females. Our findings showed more positive welfare indicating behaviours in dogs with higher mechanical pressure thresholds. We conclude that factors relating to the design of home pens and implementation of Refinements at the facility level have a significant positive impact on the welfare of laboratory-housed dogs, with a potential concomitant impact on scientific endpoints.en_UK
dc.relationScullion-Hall L, Robinson S, Finch J & Buchanan-Smith HM (2017) The influence of facility and home pen design on the welfare of the laboratory-housed dog, Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods, 83, pp. 21-29.-
dc.rights© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (
dc.subjectLaboratory-housed dogen_UK
dc.subjectHome pen designen_UK
dc.subjectFacility designen_UK
dc.titleThe influence of facility and home pen design on the welfare of the laboratory-housed dogen_UK
dc.typeJournal Articleen_UK
dc.citation.jtitleJournal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods-
dc.type.statusPublisher version (final published refereed version)-
dc.contributor.affiliationCharles River Laboratories-
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1-s2.0-S1056871916301101-main.pdf1.16 MBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.