A novel dietary restriction method for group-housed rats: weight gain and clinical chemistry characterization.

Laboratory rodents are usually fed ad libitum. Moderate dietary restriction decreases mortality and morbidity compared with ad libitum feeding. There are, however, problems in achieving dietary restriction. Traditional methods of restricted feeding may interfere with the diurnal rhythms of the animals and are not compatible with group-housing of rodents. We have invented a novel method, the diet board, for restricting the feed intake of laboratory rats. The use of the diet board moderately decreased weight gain of rats when compared with ad libitum-fed animals. The diet board retarded skeletal growth only minimally, whereas major differences were found in body fat depositions. Serum free fatty acid, triglyceride and cholesterol values were lower in diet-restricted rats, while the opposite was true for serum creatine kinase. There were no differences in total protein, albumin or alanine aminotransferase. Moreover, differences in interindividual variances in parameters were not detected between the groups; hence this study could not combine the diet board with reduction potential. The diet board provides mild to moderate dietary restriction for group-housed rats and is unlikely to interfere with the diurnal eating rhythm. The diet board can also be seen as a cage furniture item, dividing the open cage space and increasing the structural complexity of the environment. In conclusion, the diet board appears to possess refinement potential when compared with traditional methods of dietary restriction.

The diet board: welfare impacts of a novel method of dietary restriction in laboratory rats.

Laboratory rats are commonly fed ad libitum (AL). Moderate dietary restriction (DR) decreases mortality and morbidity when compared with AL feeding, but there are several obstacles to the implementation of DR. Traditional methods of restricted feeding disrupt normal diurnal eating rhythms and are not compatible with group housing. We have designed a novel method, the diet board, to restrict the feeding of group-housed rats. Animals fed from the diet board had 15% lower body weight than the AL-fed animals at the age of 17 weeks. The welfare effects of diet board feeding were assessed by comparing the stress physiology of diet board fed animals with that of AL-fed animals. Diet board feeding was associated with higher serum corticosterone levels and lower faecal secretion of IgA, suggesting the diet board causes a stress reaction. However, the AL-fed group had larger adrenal glands with higher adrenaline and noradrenaline content than the diet board animals. No gastric ulcers were found in any of the animals at necropsy. The diet board thus appears to cause a stress reaction when compared with AL-fed rats, but no apparent pathology was associated with this reaction. The diet board could help to solve the health problems associated with AL feeding, while allowing the rats to be group-housed and to maintain their normal diurnal eating rhythms. The diet board can also be seen as a functional cage furniture item, dividing the cage into compartments and thus increasing the structural complexity of the environment. In conclusion, the diet board appears to possess refinement potential compared with traditional methods of DR.

Estimates of appropriate number of rats: interaction with housing environment.

An extensive list of physiological parameters from previous experiments was re-analysed in order to evaluate the effects of enrichment, cage type and group size on the within-group variation and hence on the number of animals needed in studies using Wistar rats. The independent factors studied in these experiments included the provision of aspen gnawing blocks for enrichment, solid bottom cages (SBCs) and grid floor cages (GFCs) and animal number per cage (varied from 1-4). SOLO power analysis was used to calculate the smallest number of animals (n) needed to detect an arbitrarily chosen 20% effect size, when significance was set at P = 0.05 and statistical power at 0.90. N ratios (nlarger/nsmaller) were calculated for the effect of enrichment, cage type and group size to compare the 'treatment group' with the 'control group'. The n values of adrenal gland, interscapular brown adipose tissue (BAT) and epididymal adipose tissue (EAT) weights seemed to vary most, whereas final body weight (FBWJ and growth seemed to be the least variable ones. According to one-sample t-test, the N ratios of most physiological parameters differed significantly from zero (except the ones of FBW) indicating that n values in 'treatment' and 'control' groups were unequal. The results indicate that some of the physiological parameters are susceptible to variability attributable to environmental modifications in general whereas some are not. Furthermore, they suggest that the variation of different parameters may vary from one experiment to another and between different environments thus hindering the estimations of appropriate number of animals.