scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal Article

Effects of housing density and cage floor space on three strains of young adult inbred mice.

Abigail L Smith, +3 more
- 01 Aug 2005 - 
- Vol. 55, Iss: 4, pp 368-376
Reads0
Chats0
TLDR
Examining optimal housing densities for young adult male and female BALB/cJ, NOD/LtJ, and FVB/NJ mice concludes that all but FVB /NJ male mice can be housed with half the floor space specified in the Guide.
Abstract
Some recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (the Guide) are based on best professional judgment. Our current efforts are directed toward replacement with data-driven standards. We demonstrated earlier that young adult C57BL/6J mice could be housed with half the floor space recommended in the Guide without discernable negative effects. This report extends that work by examining optimal housing densities for young adult male and female BALB/cJ, NOD/LtJ, and FVB/NJ mice. These 8-week studies were initiated with 3-week-old BALB/cJ and NOD/LtJ mice and 3- to 5-week-old FVB/NJ mice housed in three cage types. We adjusted the number of mice per cage to house them with the floor space recommended in the Guide (approximately 12 in2 [ca. 77 cm2] per mouse) down to 5.6 in2 [ca. 36 cm2] per mouse. Early-onset aggression occurred among FVB/NJ male mice housed at all densities in cages having 51.7 in2 (ca. 333 cm2) or 112.9 in2 (ca. 728 cm2) of space. FVB/NJ male mice housed in shoebox (67.6 in2 [ca. 436 cm2]) cages did not exhibit aggression until the fifth week. Urinary testosterone output was density-dependent only for BALB/cJ male mice in shoebox cages (output decreased with increasing density) and FVB/NJ male mice. We conclude that all but FVB/NJ male mice can be housed with half the floor space specified in the Guide. The aggression noted for male FVB/NJ mice may have been due to their age span, although this did not impact negatively on the female FVB/NJ mice.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

To Group or Not to Group? Good Practice for Housing Male Laboratory Mice.

TL;DR: It is concluded that whether group- or single-housing is better (or less worse) in any situation is highly context-dependent according to several factors including strain, age, social position, life experiences, and housing and husbandry protocols.
Journal ArticleDOI

A renewed look at laboratory rodent housing and management.

Janet C. Gonder, +1 more
- 01 Jan 2007 - 
TL;DR: The discussion points out recent advances in technology and new knowledge of the conditions for the housing of various laboratory rodents, including cage space, single versus group housing, ventilated caging systems, thermoregulation, bedding materials, and enrichment.
Journal Article

Effects of housing density on weight gain, immune function, behavior, and plasma corticosterone concentrations in BALB/c and C57BL/6 mice.

TL;DR: It will be extremely challenging to scientifically determine an optimal cage density standard that can be uniformly applied across all mouse strains, and it is concluded that mice vary in their responses in the parameters measured.
Journal ArticleDOI

Effects of cage size and enrichment on reproductive performance and behavior in C57BL/6Tac mice.

TL;DR: Though being raised in enriched or large cages did not clearly improve pups' performance in behavioral tests, enrichment (regardless of cage size) did significantly benefit reproductive performance; pup from non-enriched cages weighed less than pups from enriched cages, and fewer survived to weaning age.
Journal Article

Effects of Cage Density, Sanitation Frequency, and Bedding Type on Animal Wellbeing and Health and Cage Environment in Mice and Rats

TL;DR: The finding that deviations or exceptions from the cage density and sanitation frequency standards set forth in the Guide do not negatively affect animal health, welfare, or production parameters at this institution is supported.
Related Papers (5)