scholarly journals Medical relevance of UK-funded non-human primate research published from January 1997 to July 2012

2014 ◽  
Vol 107 (7) ◽  
pp. 264-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward Moore
2016 ◽  
Vol 45 (6) ◽  
pp. 312-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfonso S. Gozalo ◽  
William R. Elkins ◽  
Lynn E. Lambert ◽  
Frida Stock ◽  
Marvin L. Thomas ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. 51-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark J. Prescott ◽  
Jan A. Langermans ◽  
Ian Ragan

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric Delwart ◽  
Michael J Tisza ◽  
Eda Altan ◽  
Yanpeng Li ◽  
Xutao Deng ◽  
...  

While recent changes in treatment have reduced the lethality of idiopathic chronic diarrhea (ICD), this condition remains one of the most common causes of rhesus macaque deaths in non-human primate research centers. We compared the eukaryotic viromes in fecal swabs from 52 animals with ICD and 41 healthy animals. Viral metagenomics targeting virus-like particles was used to identify viruses shed by each animal. Five viruses belonging to the Picornaviridae, one to the Caliciviridae, one to the Parvoviridae, and one to the Adenoviridae families were identified. The fraction of reads matching each viral species was then used to estimate and compare viral loads in ICD cases versus healthy controls. None of the eukaryotic viruses detected in fecal swabs were strongly associated with ICD. Other potential causes of ICD are discussed.


2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. e0009141
Author(s):  
Angel M. Padilla ◽  
Phil Y. Yao ◽  
Tre J. Landry ◽  
Gretchen M. Cooley ◽  
Susan M. Mahaney ◽  
...  

Trypanosoma cruzi, the causative agent of human Chagas disease, is endemic to the southern region of the United States where it routinely infects many host species. The indoor/outdoor housing configuration used in many non-human primate research and breeding facilities in the southern of the USA provides the opportunity for infection by T. cruzi and thus provides source material for in-depth investigation of host and parasite dynamics in a natural host species under highly controlled and restricted conditions. For cynomolgus macaques housed at such a facility, we used a combination of serial blood quantitative PCR (qPCR) and hemoculture to confirm infection in >92% of seropositive animals, although each method alone failed to detect infection in >20% of cases. Parasite isolates obtained from 43 of the 64 seropositive macaques were of 2 broad genetic types (discrete typing units, (DTU’s) I and IV); both within and between these DTU groupings, isolates displayed a wide variation in growth characteristics and virulence, elicited host immune responses, and susceptibility to drug treatment in a mouse model. Likewise, the macaques displayed a diversity in T cell and antibody response profiles that rarely correlated with parasite DTU type, minimum length of infection, or age of the primate. This study reveals the complexity of infection dynamics, parasite phenotypes, and immune response patterns that can occur in a primate group, despite being housed in a uniform environment at a single location, and the limited time period over which the T. cruzi infections were established.


2012 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Beat M Riederer

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 328-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gardar Arnason

The Weatherall report on the use of non-human primates in research was published in 2006. Its main conclusion was that there is a strong scientific case for the use of non-human primates in some cases, but the report stressed the importance of evaluating each case in the light of the availability of alternatives. In addition to arguing for the scientific necessity of using non-human primates in research, the report also provided an ethical justification. As could be expected, the report was harshly criticised by animal rights groups, but in the academic literature, only two critical replies appeared. In what follows, I will describe the ethical justification for non-human primate research as it is laid out in the Weatherall report and then consider the criticism in the academic literature. I conclude that the report’s ethical justification for the use of non-human primates in research, in particular in basic neuroscientific research, has not been convincingly challenged by its critics. Since the criticism of the report is limited and represents only a small part of the academic discussion about the use of non-human primates in research, and a still smaller part of the ethical discussion about animal research, it is important that the discussion continue both at the academic and social level.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document