Laboratory Animals > Laboratory Animals Online First > 10.1258/la.2009.009044

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Castelhano-Carlos, M J Articles by Baumans, V PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Original Article

Identification methods in newborn C57BL/6 mice: a developmental and behavioural evaluation

M J Castelhano-Carlos ¹ , N Sousa ¹, F Ohl ² and V Baumans ²

¹ Life and Health Science Research Institute (ICVS), Health Science School, University of Minho, 4710-057 Braga, Portugal; ² Division of Laboratory Animal Science, Department of Animals, Science and Society, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, 3584 CM Utrecht, The Netherlands

Corresponding author: M J Castelhano-Carlos. Email: mjoao{at}ecsaude.uminho.pt

The use of group-housed rodents in many fields of biomedical research imposes a need to identify individuals in a cage. Few studies have been designed to assess possible negative effects of identification methods of newborn mice on their development and wellbeing. In the present study, three different identification methods were applied to newborn C57BL/6J mice on postnatal day (pnd) 5 (toe clipping, toe tattoo ink puncture and subcutaneous implantation of a small transponder). All identification methods used proved to be effective for long-term marking of individual animals. Newborn mice showed the least reaction to toe clipping followed by toe tattoo ink puncture and transponder implantation was the most distressful individual identification procedure in newborn mice. Importantly, clipped toe tissue proved to be enough for genotyping purposes. No overall consistent differences in somatic and neurological reflex development during the postnatal period were shown as a result of the newborn individual identification procedures used. Further, none of the methods interfered significantly with the adult animals' general normal behaviour (e.g. ability to move, grasp, climb) and sensory–motor functions as assessed with a simplified SHIRPA battery of tests, as well as Rotarod and Elevated Plus Maze tests. Postmortem thymus and adrenal gland weights gave no indication of chronic stress as a consequence of the identification method. We conclude that toe clipping might even be advisable in newborn mice at a very young age, when genotyping is needed. Toe tattoo ink puncture is also a good identification method for newborn mice and transponder implantation should only be used in older newborns or applied at weaning.

Key Words: Identification • marking • wellbeing • development • behaviour

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?