Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jan 19;18(1):e0278709.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0278709. eCollection 2023.

Rating enrichment items by female group-housed laboratory mice in multiple binary choice tests using an RFID-based tracking system

Ute Hobbiesiefken  1 , Birk Urmersbach  1 , Anne Jaap  1 , Kai Diederich  1 , Lars Lewejohann  1   2
Affiliations

Rating enrichment items by female group-housed laboratory mice in multiple binary choice tests using an RFID-based tracking system

Ute Hobbiesiefken et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Laboratory mice spend most of their lives in cages, not experiments, so improving housing conditions is a first-choice approach to improving their welfare. Despite the increasing popularity of enrichment, little is known about the benefits from an animal perspective. For a detailed analysis, we categorized enrichment items according to their prospective use into the categories 'structural', 'housing', and 'foraging'. In homecage-based multiple binary choice tests 12 female C57BL/6J mice chose between enrichment items within the respective categories over a 46-hour period. A new analyzing method combined the binary decisions and ranked the enrichment items within each category by calculating worth values and consensus errors. Although there was no unequivocal ranking that was true in its entire rank order for all individual mice, certain elements (e.g. lattice ball, second plane) were always among the top positions. Overall, a high consensus error in ranking positions reflects strong individual differences in preferences which could not be resolved due to the relatively small sample size. However, individual differences in the preference for enrichment items highlights the importance of a varied enrichment approach, as there does not seem to be one item that satisfies the wants and needs of all individuals to the same degree. An enrichment concept, in which the needs of the animals are central, contributes to a more specific refinement of housing conditions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. The relative probability of preferences (worth values) and consensus errors (in percent) of all mice (n = 12) for the tested enrichment items from the categories foraging, structural and housing in the single paired comparisons.
The 46-hour period depicts the complete testing cycle whereas the active time depicts the dark phase of the testing cycle and the inactive time depicts the light phase of the testing cycle.
Fig 2
Fig 2. The relative probability preferences (worth values) of the mice from Group 1 (n = 4), Group 2 (n = 4) and Group 3 (n = 4) for the tested enrichment items from the categories foraging, structural and housing in the single paired comparisons over the entire 46-hour testing cycle.
Fig 3
Fig 3. The Mouse Positioning and Surveillance System (MoPSS).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. The European Parliament, The Council of the European Union. Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes [Internet]. European Union; 2010. Available from: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2010/63/oj.
    1. Newberry RC. Environmental enrichment: Increasing the biological relevance of captive environments. Appl Anim Behav Sci. 1995;44(2–4):229–43.
    1. Olsson IAS, Dahlborn K. Improving housing conditions for laboratory mice: A review of “environmental enrichment.” Lab Anim. 2002;36(3):243–70. - PubMed
    1. Lewejohann L, Sachser N. Evaluation of different housing conditions for male laboratory mice by means of preference tests. KTBL SCHRIFT. 2000;170–7.
    1. Duncan IJH, Olsson IAS. Environmental enrichment: from flawed concept to pseudo-science. In: Proceedings International Congress of th e ISAE 2001, Davis, USA. 2001.