Hydrophobic Sand Versus Metabolic Cages: A Comparison of Urine Collection Methods for Rats (Rattus norvegicus)

疏水沙与代谢笼:大鼠(Rattus norvegicus)尿液收集方法的比较

阅读:9
作者:Jessica F Hoffman, Anya X Fan, Elizabeth H Neuendorf, Vernieda B Vergara, John F Kalinich

Abstract

A common method for urine collection from rats requires the use of a metabolic cage, thus exposing animals to extended periods of isolation in an unfamiliar cage with a wire-mesh floor. A new method involving hydrophobic sand, a material more similar to bedding, has become available recently but has not been extensively compared with metabolic cages in regard to collection efficiency or stress. Using a within-subjects crossover design, we examined differences in stress markers, urinary markers, and urine volume of clinically healthy male Sprague-Dawley rats during 2-, 4-, and 6-h collection sessions in hydrophobic sand and metabolic cages. Stress response markers of weight loss, fecal pellet output, or corticosterone did not differ between hydrophobic sand and metabolic cages, and observed behavior suggested that sand may be less stressful than metabolic cages. All clinically relevant urinary markers examined were normal, with no differences between collection methods. Total urine volume collected was greater from the metabolic cage than sand in 3 of the 5 sessions, but the volume collected during the shortest session (2 h) did not differ between methods and accounted for 62% of the total volume collected during the longest session (6 h). Our results suggest that hydrophobic sand is a refinement of urine collection methods for rats that decreases isolation time, risk of injury, and stress and maintains the integrity of urine samples.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。