Cephalopods in neuroscience: regulations,research and the 3Rs

Cephalopods have been utilised in neuroscience research for more than 100 years particularly because of their phenotypic plasticity, complex and centralised nervous system, tractability for studies of learning and cellular mechanisms of memory (e.g. long-term potentiation) and anatomical features facilitating physiological studies (e.g. squid giant axon and synapse). On 1 January 2013, research using any of the about 700 extant species of “live cephalopods” became regulated within the European Union by Directive 2010/63/EU on the “Protection of Animals used for Scientific Purposes”, giving cephalopods the same EU legal protection as previously afforded only to vertebrates. The Directive has a number of implications, particularly for neuroscience research. These include: (1) projects will need justification, authorisation from local competent authorities, and be subject to review including a harm-benefit assessment and adherence to the 3Rs principles (Replacement, Refinement and Reduction). (2) To support project evaluation and compliance with the new EU law, guidelines specific to cephalopods will need to be developed, covering capture, transport, handling, housing, care, maintenance, health monitoring, humane anaesthesia, analgesia and euthanasia. (3) Objective criteria need to be developed to identify signs of pain, suffering, distress and lasting harm particularly in the context of their induction by an experimental procedure. Despite diversity of views existing on some of these topics, this paper reviews the above topics and describes the approaches being taken by the cephalopod research community (represented by the authorship) to produce “guidelines” and the potential contribution of neuroscience research to cephalopod welfare.     

Refinement: promoting the three Rs in practice

Refinement of scientific procedures carried out on protected animals is an iterative process, which begins with a critical evaluation of practice. The process continues with objective assessment of the impact of the procedures, identification of areas for improvement, selection and implementation of an improvement strategy and evaluation of the results to determine whether there has been the desired effect, completing the refinement loop and resulting in the perpetuation of good practice. Refinements may be science-driven (those which facilitate getting high-quality results) or welfare-driven or may encompass both groups, but whatever the driver, refinements almost always result in benefits to both welfare and science. Refinements can be implemented in all aspects of animal use: improved methodology in invasive techniques, housing and husbandry, and even statistical analyses can all benefit animal welfare and scientific quality. If refinement is not actively sought, outdated and unnecessarily invasive techniques may not be replaced by better methods as they become available, and thus outdated information is passed down to the next generation, causing perpetuation of old-fashioned methods. This leads to a spiral of ignorance, leading ultimately to poor practice, poor animal welfare and poor-quality scientific data. Refinement is a legal and ethical requirement, yet refinements may not always be implemented. There are numerous obstacles to the implementation of refinement, which may be real or perceived. Either way, in order to take refinement forward, it is important to coordinate the approach to refinement, validate the science behind refinement, ensure there is adequate education and training in new techniques, improve liaison between users and make sure there is feedback on suitability of refinements for use. Overall, refinement requires a coordinated ongoing process of critical appraisal of practice and active scrutiny of resources for likely improvements. In the busy world of biomedical research, this process needs help. In order to develop these themes further, a workshop was held at the LASA Winter Meeting 2006, UK, to assist in identifying potential obstacles to refinement, and then to explore and develop strategies for overcoming these obstacles in key areas. A range of strategies appropriate to different circumstances was identified, which should facilitate the implementation of refinements.     

The role of organizational culture in compliance with the principles of the 3Rs

In order for their research to be legitimate, scientists carrying out research using animals must comply with rules and regulations. The 3Rs (replacement, reduction and refinement) are one set of guidelines that help to promote the ethical use of animals for research. An important question is whether implementing the principles of the 3Rs in legal regulations, such as a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes, will increase compliance with the principles of the 3Rs in research organizations. Previous work suggests that organizational culture is just as important for directing behavior as are formalized rules and regulations. This article introduces the concepts of compliance and organizational culture and discusses their consequences on the implementation of the principles of the 3Rs.