Fish are increasingly used as experimental animals across research fields. Currently, around a quarter of all experimental animals used are fish. Less than 20% of these are standard model species. Welfare assessments for experimental fish are in their infancy compared with those for rodents. This can be attributed to the diversity of species used, the relative recency of fish as the go-to model for research, and challenges to assess welfare in non-vocal underwater species. The lack of guidelines and tools presents a challenge for researchers (particularly, for newcomers), for ethics committees and for implementing refinement measures. Here, we present an adaptable, user-friendly score sheet for fish based on MS Excel. The parameters are based on a literature review, have been validated by expert interviews and evaluated by a fish pathologist. The tool allows scoring of individual fish as well as groups, calculates summary scores and visualizes trends. We provide the underlying literature, give use examples and provide instructions on the adaptation and use of the score sheet. We hope that this tool will empower researchers to include welfare assessment in their routines, foster discussions on fish welfare parameters among scientists, facilitate interactions with ethics committees and, most importantly, enable the refinement of fish experiments.
DrummondRRussomCLGeigerD, et al. Behavioral and Morphological Changes in Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) as Diagnostic Endpoints for Screening Chemicals According to Mode of Action. In: Poston, Purdy (ed) Aquatic Toxicology and Environmental Fate: Ninth Volume. West Conshohocken: ASTM International, 1986, pp. 415–435.
2.
BolisCLPiccolellaMDalla ValleAZ, et al.
Fish as model in pharmacological and biological research. Pharmacol Res2001;
44: 265–280.
3.
MarquesIJErnstAAroraP, et al.
Wt1 transcription factor impairs cardiomyocyte specification and drives a phenotypic switch from myocardium to epicardium. Development2022;
149.
4.
KratochwilCFSeftonMMMeyerA.Embryonic and larval development in the Midas cichlid fish species flock (Amphilophus spp.): A new evo-devo model for the investigation of adaptive novelties and species differences. BMC Dev Biol2015;
15: 12.
5.
SchartlM.Beyond the zebrafish: Diverse fish species for modeling human disease. Dis Model Mech2013;
7: 181–192.
6.
KasperCKöllikerMPostmaE, et al.
Consistent cooperation in a cichlid fish is caused by maternal and developmental effects rather than heritable genetic variation. Proc Biol Sci2017;
284: 20170369 http://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2017.0369.
7.
ClarkTDRabyGDRocheDG, et al.
Ocean acidification does not impair the behaviour of coral reef fishes. Nature2020;
577: 370–375.
8.
ToniMMancioccoAAngiulliE, et al.
Review: Assessing fish welfare in research and aquaculture, with a focus on European directives. Animal2019;
13: 161–170.
9.
PeichelCLMarquesDA.The genetic and molecular architecture of phenotypic diversity in sticklebacks. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci2017;
372: 20150486 http://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0486.
10.
LiuZRoestiMMarquesD, et al.
Chromosomal fusions facilitate adaptation to divergent environments in Threespine Stickleback. Mol Biol Evol2022;
39: msab358, https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msab358.
11.
ArchambeaultSLBärtschiLRMerminodAD, et al.
Adaptation via pleiotropy and linkage: Association mapping reveals a complex genetic architecture within the stickleback Eda locus. Evol Lett2020;
4: 282–301.
12.
IshikawaAKabeyaNIkeyaK, et al.
A key metabolic gene for recurrent freshwater colonization and radiation in fishes. Science2019;
364: 886–889.
13.
MarquesIJSanz-MorejónAMercaderN.Ventricular cryoinjury as a model to study heart regeneration in zebrafish. In: PossKDKühnB (eds) Cardiac regeneration: Methods and protocols.
New York, NY:
Springer US, 2021, pp. 51–62.
14.
SegnerH.Zebrafish (Danio rerio) as a model organism for investigating endocrine disruption. Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol2009;
149: 187–195.
MochoJ-Pvon KroghK.A FELASA Working Group survey on fish species used for research, methods of euthanasia, health monitoring, and biosecurity in Europe, North America, and Oceania. Biology (Basel)2022;
11: 1259.
17.
KawasakiTSaitoKDeguchiT, et al.
Pharmacological characterization of isoproterenol-treated medaka fish. Pharmacol Res2008;
58: 348–355.
18.
ParrottJLAlaeeMWangD, et al.
Fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) embryo to adult exposure to decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5). Chemosphere2013;
93: 813–818.
19.
Schmidt-PosthausHRosAHirschiR, et al.
Comparative study of proliferative kidney disease in grayling Thymallus thymallus and brown trout Salmo trutta fario: An exposure experiment. Dis Aquat Organ2017;
123: 193–203.
20.
JadhaoAGMalzCR.Nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate (NADPH)-diaphorase activity in the brain of a cichlid fish, with remarkable findings in the entopeduncular nucleus: A histochemical study. J Chem Neuroanat2004;
27: 75–86.
21.
WegnerKMKalbeMRauchG, et al.
Genetic variation in MHC class II expression and interactions with MHC sequence polymorphism in three-spined sticklebacks. Mol Ecol2006;
15: 1153–1164.
22.
LiM-H.Effects of nonylphenol on cholinesterase and carboxylesterase activities in male guppies (Poecilia reticulata). Ecotoxicol Environ Saf2008;
71: 781–786.
23.
AyllonFGarcia-VazquezE.Induction of micronuclei and other nuclear abnormalities in European minnow Phoxinus phoxinus and mollie Poecilia latipinna: An assessment of the fish micronucleus test. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen2000;
467: 177–186.
24.
Adrian-KalchhauserIHirschPEBehrmann-GodelJ, et al.
The invasive bighead goby Ponticola kessleri displays large-scale genetic similarities and small-scale genetic differentiation in relation to shipping patterns. Mol Ecol2016;
25: 1925–1943.
25.
RusselWMSBurchRL.The principles of humane experimental technique.
London:
Methuen, 1959.
26.
European Parliament. Directive 2010/63/EU: LEX-FAOC098296, https://www.fao.org/faolex/results/details/en/c/LEXFAOC098296/, (2010 last accessed on 21 August 2024).
27.
AleströmPD’AngeloLMidtlyngPJ, et al.
Zebrafish: Housing and husbandry recommendations. Lab Anim2020;
54: 213–224.
28.
BrambellFWR.Report of the Technical Committee to enquire into the welfare of animals kept under intensive livestock husbandry systems.
London:
Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1965.
29.
Tierschutzgesetz (TSchG). Schweiz 2008, Art. 3. Available from: https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/2008/414/de
30.
JohansenRNeedhamJRColquhounDJ, et al.
Guidelines for health and welfare monitoring of fish used in research. Lab Anim2006;
40: 323–340.
31.
LambertHCornishAElwinA, et al.
A kettle of fish: A review of the scientific literature for evidence of fish sentience. Animals2022;
12: 1182.
32.
SneddonLU.Pain perception in fish: Indicators and endpoints. ILAR J2009;
50: 338–342.
33.
SneddonLU.Pain in aquatic animals. J Exp Biol2015;
218: 967–976.
34.
SneddonLU.Evolution of nociception and pain: Evidence from fish models. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci2019;
374: 20190290.
35.
SneddonLUBraithwaiteVAGentleMJ.Do fishes have nociceptors? Evidence for the evolution of a vertebrate sensory system. Proc Biol Sci2003;
270: 1115–1121.
36.
GriffinGGauthierC.Guidelines development and scientific uncertainty: Use of previous case studies to promote efficient production of guidelines on the care and use of fish in research, teaching and testing. Anim Welf2004;
13: S181–S186.
37.
BrowmanHICookeSJCowxIG, et al.
Welfare of aquatic animals: Where things are, where they are going, and what it means for research, aquaculture, recreational angling, and commercial fishing. ICES J Mar Sci2019;
76: 82–92.
38.
JarvisSEllisMATurnbullJF, et al.
Qualitative behavioral assessment in juvenile farmed Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar): Potential for on-farm welfare assessment. Front Vet Sci2021;
8: 702783.
39.
ReillySCQuinnJPCossinsAR, et al.
Behavioural analysis of a nociceptive event in fish: Comparisons between three species demonstrate specific responses. Appl Anim Behav Sci2008;
114: 248–259.
40.
VolpatoGL.Challenges in assessing fish welfare. ILAR J2009;
50: 329–337.
41.
GoodwinNKarpNABlackledgeS, et al.
Standardized welfare terms for the zebrafish community. Zebrafish2016;
13(Suppl. 1): S164–S168.
42.
OECD. Test no. 203: Fish, acute toxicity test, OECD Guidelines for the testing of chemicals section 2. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2019.
43.
ReedBJenningsM. Guidance on the housing and care of zebrafish, RSPCA, 2010, pp. 11–20. https://norecopa.no/textbase/guidance-on-the-housing-andcare-of-zebrafish-danio-rerio
44.
MeadowsJRSLindblad-TohK.Dissecting evolution and disease using comparative vertebrate genomics. Nat Rev Genet2017;
18: 624–636.
45.
DalmauAVelardeAScottK, et al. Welfare Quality® assessment for pigs (sows and piglets, growing and finishing pigs), Lelystad: Welfare Quality® consortium, Lelystad, 2009.
46.
BrownC.Fish intelligence, sentience and ethics. Anim Cogn2015;
18: 1–17.
47.
MangusLMFrançaMSShivaprasadHL, et al.
Research-relevant background lesions and conditions in common avian and aquatic species. ILAR J2021;
62: 169–202.
48.
TschirrenLBachmannDGülerAC, et al.
MyFishCheck: A model to assess fish welfare in aquaculture. Animals2021;
11: 145. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11010145
49.
BrowningH.Improving welfare assessment in aquaculture. Front Vet Sci2023; 10: https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1060720.
50.
Garcia de LeanizCGutierrez RabadanCBarrentoSI, et al.
Addressing the welfare needs of farmed lumpfish: Knowledge gaps, challenges and solutions. Rev Aquac2022;
14: 139–155.
51.
NobleCGismervikKIversenM, et al. Welfare indicators for farmed Atlantic salmon: Tools for assessing fish welfare, Report, nofima, 2018.
52.
MunnZPetersMDJSternC, et al.
Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol2018;
18: 143.
53.
SaxbyAAdamsLSnellgroveD, et al.
The effect of group size on the behaviour and welfare of four fish species commonly kept in home aquaria. Appl Anim Behav Sci2010;
125: 195–205.
54.
BorgesACPereiraNFrancoM, et al.
Implementation of a zebrafish health program in a research facility: A 4-year retrospective study. Zebrafish2016;
13(Suppl. 1): S115–S126.
55.
BarabanSCDindayMTHortopanGA.Drug screening in Scn1a zebrafish mutant identifies clemizole as a potential Dravet syndrome treatment. Nat Commun2013;
4: 2410.
56.
JutfeltFSundinJRabyGD, et al.
Two‐current choice flumes for testing avoidance and preference in aquatic animals. Methods Ecol Evol2017;
8: 379–390.
57.
KamJYHortleEKrogmanE, et al.
Rough and smooth variants of Mycobacterium abscessus are differentially controlled by host immunity during chronic infection of adult zebrafish. Nat Commun2022;
13: 952.
58.
MartinsTValentimAMPereiraN, et al.
Anaesthesia and analgesia in laboratory adult zebrafish: A question of refinement. Lab Anim2016;
50: 476–488.
59.
QuevedoCBehlMRyanK, et al.
Detection and prioritization of developmentally neurotoxic and/or neurotoxic compounds using zebrafish. Toxicol Sci2019;
168: 225–240.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
