Home >> Archive >>Vol:1, No:2>>Use of Fish As Experimental Animals in Biomedical Research

Use of Fish As Experimental Animals in Biomedical Research

| İbrahim Cengizler |

Year: 2022 | Vol: 1 | No: 2 | PP 61-68
Abstract
Factors such as the fact that fish are not difficult to maintain and breed, easy to obtain, and the environment in which they live can be easily adjusted according to demand and number, cause them to be preferred as experimental animals. In addition, the ease of application of drugs and chemicals to be used in experiments (depending on their water solubility) makes the use of fish as experimental animals widespread. However in the case of using fish as experimental animals, first of all, it is necessary to know their basic biological structures very well. Because fishes constitute the lowest group in terms of evolution among the pisces, amphibia, reptilia, aves and mamalia groups in the vertebrata subphylum, and some of their characteristics are quite different from mammals. Evolutionary positions and aquatic life characteristics of fish have caused them to be considered as ideal creatures in the study of both somatic and reproductive and molecular evolution. In recent years, fish have started to be seen as an important experimental model in the field of biomedical, especially in subjects such as embryology, neurobiology, and endocrinology. In this article, information about the use of fish as experimental animals in biomedical research is given, and in addition to this, the historical process of using other animals as test subjects is also examined.

Keywords
Pisces; Animal; Experiment; Biomedical
Full Paper (PDF)

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. According to Creative Commons: This license allows reusers to copy and distribute the material in any medium or format in unadapted form only, for noncommercial purposes only, and only so long as attribution is given to the creator.

References
  1. Cohen, B. J and Loew, F. M Laboratory animal medicine: historical perspectives. In Laboratory animal medicine/edited by JG Fox, BJ Cohen, FM Loew, 1984.
  2. Greek, C R. and Greek, J. S. Sacred cows and golden geese: The human cost of experiments on animals. A&C Black, 2000.
  3. Taylor, K. and Alvarez, L. R. An estimate of the number of animals used for scientific purposes worldwide in 2015. In Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 47 (5-6): 196-213, 2019.
  4. Gorden, P Non-insulin dependent diabetes--the past, present and future. In Annals of the Academy of Medicine, Singapore, 26 (3): 326-330, 1997.
  5. Wilmut, I.; Schnieke, A. E; McWhir, J.; Kind, A. J and Campbell, K. HS Viable offspring derived from fetal and adult mammalian cells. In nature, 385 (6619): 810-813, 1997.
  6. Ryder, R. D Animal revolution: Changing attitudes towards speciesism. In Animal Welfare, 10 (2): 222-222, 2001.
  7. Croce, P. Vivisection or science? An investigation into testing drugs and safeguarding health.
  8. Russell, W. M. S. and Burch, R. L. The principles of humane experimental technique. Methuen, 1959.
  9. Augustyniak, J.; Bertero, A.; Coccini, T.; Baderna, D.; Buzanska, L. and Caloni, F. Organoids are promising tools for species-specific in vitro toxicological studies. In Journal of Applied Toxicology, 39 (12): 1610-1622, 2019.
  10. Taylor, K. and Alvarez, L. R. An estimate of the number of animals used for scientific purposes worldwide in 2015. In Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 47 (5-6): 196-213, 2019.
  11. Matthews, K. A; Kaufman, T. C and Gelbart, W. M Research resources for Drosophila: the expanding universe. In Nature Reviews Genetics, 6 (3): 179-193, 2005.
  12. Antoshechkin, I. and Sternberg, P. W The versatile worm: genetic and genomic resources for Caenorhabditis elegans research. In Nature Reviews Genetics, 8 (7): 518-532, 2007.
  13. Rosenthal, N. and Brown, S. The mouse ascending: perspectives for human-disease models. In Nature cell biology, 9 (9): 993-999, 2007.
  14. Home Office, UK Annual statistics of scientific procedures on living animals Great Britain 2015.
  15. Sarihan, E and Cengizler, .I Temel balik anatomisi ve fizyolojisi. 172. In Nobel kitabevi, Çukurova "universitesi su "ur"unleri fak"ultesi, Adana, 2006.
  16. Sinmez, C. C. and Yasar, A. Experimental animal use in Turkey: A comparison with other countries. In Alternatives to Laboratory Animals, 47 (2): 82-92, 2019.
  17. Law, J M. Mechanistic considerations in small fish carcinogenicity testing. In ILAR journal, 42 (4): 274-284, 2001.
  18. Sneddon, L. U Pain in aquatic animals. In The Journal of experimental biology, 218 (7): 967-976, 2015.
  19. Algers, B; Blokhuis, HJ; Botner, A; Broom, DM; Costa, P; Domingo, M; Greiner, M; Hartung, J; Koenen, F; M"uller-Graf, C and thers, General approach to fish welfare and to the concept of sentience in fish—scientific opinion of the panel on animal health and welfare. In EFSA Journal, 954: 1-27, 2009.
  20. Medway, L. Report of the Panel of Enquiry into Shooting and Angling. c/o Causeway. In Horsham, Sussex, RH121HG, England, 1980.
  21. Gruber, F. P and Hartung, T. Alternatives to animal experimentation in basic research. In ALTEX-Alternatives to animal experimentation, 21 (Supp): 3-31, 2004.