Non-lethal sampling of sea birds at Svalbard
The purpose of the experiment is to characterise the combined effect of climate change and pollution on increasing infectious diseases in the Arctic. The expected distress for the animals is minimal. This is because this project utilises non-lethal methodologies only (i.e. feathers, swabs, blood), thus there is minimal disturbance to the individuals sampled and there are no long-term effects to the population. Further, this project takes advantage of ongoing seabird monitoring on Svalbard, and thus maximises the amount of information that is received in these already established monitoring programs. By approaching a field event in this manner we significantly minimise any unnecessary stress to the animals while optimising the amount of information gained.
The expected scientific and social benefit is large. The effect pollutants have on disease resistance and the ability of a host to respond has not yet been identified, and the relationship between climate change and emerging infectious diseases, especially in the Arctic, is still unclear. This is important as (re)emerging infectious diseases are on the rise, and 72% are zoonoses that originated in wildlife (e.g. Ebola). This is important for both wildlife and human health.
We will non-lethally sample 30 black-legged kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla) and 30 Brünnich´s guillemots (Uria lomvia). We have adhered to the three R principles (i.e. replacement, reduction, and refinement) in the following ways. We have considered alternative methods for replacement of wild animals (e.g. cell culture). However, as our project employs complete non-destructive methods the cost to the individual animal (negligible) outweighs the benefit. Further, as this project aims to elucidate the specific cause of decline for seabirds it is necessary to sample the actual bird. Studying wild animals will provide a more accurate representation, of which laboratory experiments cannot. We have based our numbers on the lowest amount of samples needed to obtain statistical significance for our model. However, limiting our numbers to reduce the amount of animals is not necessary, as the non-destructive methods provides little stress to the individual (and the birds are being caught and sampled regardless, thus we are optimizing the amount of information from each sampling event). What we are proposing (blood sampling), is classified as minor manipulation procedures by the Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds in Research by the Ornithological Council. For all procedures, handling time will be minimized, such that sampling periods will not take longer than a few minutes. The amount of blood we are proposing to take is significantly below the published guideline of the volume of blood that can be taken without having lasting adverse effects.
The expected scientific and social benefit is large. The effect pollutants have on disease resistance and the ability of a host to respond has not yet been identified, and the relationship between climate change and emerging infectious diseases, especially in the Arctic, is still unclear. This is important as (re)emerging infectious diseases are on the rise, and 72% are zoonoses that originated in wildlife (e.g. Ebola). This is important for both wildlife and human health.
We will non-lethally sample 30 black-legged kittiwakes (Rissa tridactyla) and 30 Brünnich´s guillemots (Uria lomvia). We have adhered to the three R principles (i.e. replacement, reduction, and refinement) in the following ways. We have considered alternative methods for replacement of wild animals (e.g. cell culture). However, as our project employs complete non-destructive methods the cost to the individual animal (negligible) outweighs the benefit. Further, as this project aims to elucidate the specific cause of decline for seabirds it is necessary to sample the actual bird. Studying wild animals will provide a more accurate representation, of which laboratory experiments cannot. We have based our numbers on the lowest amount of samples needed to obtain statistical significance for our model. However, limiting our numbers to reduce the amount of animals is not necessary, as the non-destructive methods provides little stress to the individual (and the birds are being caught and sampled regardless, thus we are optimizing the amount of information from each sampling event). What we are proposing (blood sampling), is classified as minor manipulation procedures by the Guidelines to the Use of Wild Birds in Research by the Ornithological Council. For all procedures, handling time will be minimized, such that sampling periods will not take longer than a few minutes. The amount of blood we are proposing to take is significantly below the published guideline of the volume of blood that can be taken without having lasting adverse effects.