Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32898190›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Impact of three commonly used blood sampling techniques on the welfare of laboratory mice: Taking the animal's perspective.

Neele Meyer, Mareike Kröger, Julia Thümmler, Lisa Tietze, Rupert Palme, Chadi Touma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. CRISPR/Cas9-DrivenInternational journal of medical sciences · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Acclimation and Blood Sampling: Effects on Stress Markers in C57Bl/6J Mice.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Refinement in the European Union: A Systematic Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Review
  14. Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Effect of safflower oil (Food chemistry. Molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  17. A Comparison of Blood Collection Techniques in Mice and their Effects on Welfare.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022
    Article
  18. Improving the Quality of EDTA-treated Blood Specimens from Mice.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Neele MeyerDepartment of Behavioural Biology, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrueck, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4955-4488
Mareike KrögerDepartment of Behavioural Biology, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrueck, Germany.
Julia ThümmlerResearch Group of Psychoneuroendocrinology, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Munich, Germany.
Lisa TietzeResearch Group of Psychoneuroendocrinology, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Munich, Germany.
Rupert PalmeUnit of Physiology, Pathophysiology and Experimental Endocrinology, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Chadi ToumaDepartment of Behavioural Biology, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrueck, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laboratory mice are the most frequently used animals in biomedical research. In accordance with guidelines for humane handling, several blood sampling techniques have been established. While the effects of these procedures on blood quality and histological alterations at the sampling site are well studied, their impact on the animals' welfare has not been extensively investigated. Therefore, our study aimed to compare three commonly used blood sampling techniques regarding their effects on different indicators of animal welfare, including physiological and behavioural response stress parameters, including pain measures, home-cage behaviour and nest-building as well as exploratory activity and neophobia. Male C57BL/6J mice were subjected to a single blood collection from either the vena facialis, the retrobulbar sinus or the tail vessel, or were allocated to the respective control treatment. While all blood sampling techniques led to an acute increase in plasma corticosterone levels, the response was strongest in animals that underwent sampling from the vena facialis and the retrobulbar sinus. Similar results were observed when the time-course of adrenocortical activity was monitored via corticosterone metabolites from faecal samples. Blood collection from the vena facialis and the retrobulbar sinus also decreased exploration of novel stimuli, resulted in decreased nest-building activity and induced higher scores in the Mouse Grimace Scale. Moreover, locomotor activity and anxiety-related behaviour were strongly affected after facial vein bleeding. Interestingly, tail vessel bleeding only induced little alterations in the assessed physiological and behavioural parameters. Importantly, the observed effects in all treatment groups were no longer detectable after 24 hours, indicating only short-term impacts. Thus, by also taking the animal's perspective and comprehensively assessing the severity of the particular sampling procedures, the results of our study contribute to Refinement within the 3R concept and allow researchers to objectively select the most appropriate and welfare-friendly blood sampling technique for a given experiment.

Indexed as

Adrenal Cortex HormonesAnimalsAnimals, LaboratoryAnimal WelfareBehavior, AnimalBlood Specimen CollectionMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLAdrenal Cortex Hormones

Identifiers

PMID32898190
PMCPMC7478650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.