dc.contributor.author
Voit, Marielu
dc.contributor.author
Merle, Roswitha
dc.contributor.author
Baumgartner, Katrin
dc.contributor.author
Fersen, Lorenzo von
dc.contributor.author
Reese, Lukas
dc.contributor.author
Ladwig-Wiegard, Mechthild
dc.contributor.author
Will, Hermann
dc.contributor.author
Tallo-Parra, Oriol
dc.contributor.author
Carbajal, Annaïs
dc.contributor.author
Lopez-Bejar, Manel
dc.contributor.author
Thöne-Reineke, Christa
dc.date.accessioned
2020-12-18T13:55:11Z
dc.date.available
2020-12-18T13:55:11Z
dc.identifier.uri
https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/handle/fub188/29113
dc.identifier.uri
http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-28863
dc.description.abstract
The most common feather sampling method for feather corticosterone measurement is by plucking the feathers from the bird’s skin. This procedure performed on living, restrained birds is qualified as an animal experiment according to German/European legislation, which has to be applied for from the competent authorities. The Directive 2010/63/EU requires the full implementation of the 3-R Principle of Russel and Burch in animal experiments, which means not only to replace the use of animals, but also to reduce the number of animals used and to refine procedures whenever possible. In response to this issue, the aim of this study was to validate an alternative, less invasive sampling method by cutting feathers close to the skin in comparison to the gold standard of plucking them. For this proof-of-principle study, a conventional poultry husbandry with trial groups of geese (Anser anser domesticus) and ducks (Anas sterilis) was selected. All birds were kept under the same living conditions to standardize the influencing factors regarding husbandry, and thus, their stress levels. Feather samples were collected between the shoulders from 46 geese and 51 ducks, both by cutting as well as by plucking, directly after slaughter for meat production. Feather corticosterone levels were measured with Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Results were compared using Bland–Altman plots and concordance correlation coefficients (CCC). It could be seen that concordance between corticosterone levels in cut and plucked feathers was rather poor: 0.38 for Anser, and 0.57 for Anas. However, comparing the mean corticosterone values in pg/mm of each species with their respective standard deviations, the differences between the methods were negligible. As the results showed that the differences between the individuals were markedly greater than the differences between the methods, the determination of corticosterone levels in cut feathers is valid compared to using plucked feathers. The validation tests of ELISA showed only acceptable repeatability and reliability. Hence, the results should be verified in further studies. In conclusion, it is recommended for future research to use cut instead of plucked feathers for corticosterone measurement.
en
dc.format.extent
17 Seiten
dc.rights.uri
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.subject
feather corticosterone
en
dc.subject
comparative study
en
dc.subject
plucked feathers
en
dc.subject
cut feathers
en
dc.subject
Domestic Goose
en
dc.subject
animal welfare
en
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::630 Landwirtschaft::630 Landwirtschaft und verwandte Bereiche
dc.subject.ddc
600 Technik, Medizin, angewandte Wissenschaften::630 Landwirtschaft::636 Viehwirtschaft
dc.title
Validation of an Alternative Feather Sampling Method to Measure Corticosterone
dc.type
Wissenschaftlicher Artikel
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber
2054
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.doi
10.3390/ani10112054
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.journaltitle
Animals
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.number
11
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.originalpublishername
MDPI
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.volume
10
dcterms.bibliographicCitation.url
https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10112054
refubium.affiliation
Veterinärmedizin
refubium.affiliation.other
Institut für Veterinär-Epidemiologie und Biometrie
refubium.note.author
Die Publikation wurde aus Open Access Publikationsgeldern der Freien Universität Berlin gefördert.
refubium.resourceType.isindependentpub
no
dcterms.accessRights.openaire
open access
dcterms.isPartOf.eissn
2076-2615