Should Scientific Research Involving Decapod Crustaceans Require Ethical Review?

Decapod crustaceans are faceless animals with five pairs of legs, an external skeleton and multiple nerve centres (ganglia) rather than a single brain (as in vertebrates). They include common seafood species such as crayfish, crabs, lobsters, prawns and shrimp. These characteristics make them diffic...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of agricultural & environmental ethics 2018-10, Vol.31 (5), p.625-634
Main Author: Rowe, Anthony
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Agricultural Economics
Anatomy
Animal care
Animal rights movement
Animal welfare
Animals
Brain
Brain architecture
Crabs
Crayfish
Crustacea
Crustaceans
Decapoda
Education
Environmental ethics
Ethics
Evolutionary Biology
Ganglia
Literature reviews
Lobsters
Pain
Pharmacology
Philosophy
Plant Sciences
Prawns
Public awareness
Research methodology
Review Paper
Scientific method
Seafood
Theory of Medicine/Bioethics
Vertebrates
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-833c3075d3c521d5940d30341dda1c33537c23b65f1a3f1d9adfcf6f8e5d382f3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-833c3075d3c521d5940d30341dda1c33537c23b65f1a3f1d9adfcf6f8e5d382f3
container_end_page 634
container_issue 5
container_start_page 625
container_title Journal of agricultural & environmental ethics
container_volume 31
creator Rowe, Anthony
description Decapod crustaceans are faceless animals with five pairs of legs, an external skeleton and multiple nerve centres (ganglia) rather than a single brain (as in vertebrates). They include common seafood species such as crayfish, crabs, lobsters, prawns and shrimp. These characteristics make them difficult to empathise with and consequently legal protection of decapods ranges from strong (Norway and New Zealand), through circumstantial (Australia and Italy) to non-existent (in many other countries). Whether they are capable of experiencing pain depends on definitions and the requirement for absolute proof of an inherently subjective psychological experience. Yet like other animals, decapods fulfil neuroanatomical, pharmacological and behavioural criteria that are consistent with a pain response. Whether they experience stress, harm and distress is less controversial because these conditions are more measurable than the pain response. To balance animal welfare concerns with scientific merit whilst providing confidence for the growing public awareness of crustacean welfare, use of decapod crustaceans in research should require ethical review.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10806-018-9750-7
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2123990427</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2123990427</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-833c3075d3c521d5940d30341dda1c33537c23b65f1a3f1d9adfcf6f8e5d382f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wNuC52gms7vZPYnUr0JBsQreQsxHm7LutsluxX9vSgVPnmYGnvcdeAg5B3YJjImrCKxiJWVQ0VoUjIoDMoJCIEXO3w_TDpWgoirxmJzEuGKM1RXkI_I8X3ZDY7K59rbtvfM6e7HRqqCX2bTdds3Wt4vs1mq17kw2CUPslbaqjQnbDD7Y7K5feq2adG-9_bo-JUdONdGe_c4xebu_e5080tnTw3RyM6MaoexphaiRicKgLjiYos6ZQYY5GKNAIxYoNMePsnCg0IGplXHala6yKVJxh2Nyse9dh24z2NjLVTeENr2UHDjWNcu5SBTsKR26GIN1ch38pwrfEpjciZN7cTKJkztxcpfh-0xMbLuw4a_5_9AP1mJwVQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2123990427</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Should Scientific Research Involving Decapod Crustaceans Require Ethical Review?</title><source>Business Source Ultimate</source><source>Art, Design &amp; Architecture Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>ABI/INFORM Global</source><source>Springer Nature</source><creator>Rowe, Anthony</creator><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Anthony</creatorcontrib><description>Decapod crustaceans are faceless animals with five pairs of legs, an external skeleton and multiple nerve centres (ganglia) rather than a single brain (as in vertebrates). They include common seafood species such as crayfish, crabs, lobsters, prawns and shrimp. These characteristics make them difficult to empathise with and consequently legal protection of decapods ranges from strong (Norway and New Zealand), through circumstantial (Australia and Italy) to non-existent (in many other countries). Whether they are capable of experiencing pain depends on definitions and the requirement for absolute proof of an inherently subjective psychological experience. Yet like other animals, decapods fulfil neuroanatomical, pharmacological and behavioural criteria that are consistent with a pain response. Whether they experience stress, harm and distress is less controversial because these conditions are more measurable than the pain response. To balance animal welfare concerns with scientific merit whilst providing confidence for the growing public awareness of crustacean welfare, use of decapod crustaceans in research should require ethical review.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1187-7863</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-322X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10806-018-9750-7</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands</publisher><subject>Agricultural Economics ; Anatomy ; Animal care ; Animal rights movement ; Animal welfare ; Animals ; Brain ; Brain architecture ; Crabs ; Crayfish ; Crustacea ; Crustaceans ; Decapoda ; Education ; Environmental ethics ; Ethics ; Evolutionary Biology ; Ganglia ; Literature reviews ; Lobsters ; Pain ; Pharmacology ; Philosophy ; Plant Sciences ; Prawns ; Public awareness ; Research methodology ; Review Paper ; Scientific method ; Seafood ; Theory of Medicine/Bioethics ; Vertebrates</subject><ispartof>Journal of agricultural &amp; environmental ethics, 2018-10, Vol.31 (5), p.625-634</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2018</rights><rights>Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-833c3075d3c521d5940d30341dda1c33537c23b65f1a3f1d9adfcf6f8e5d382f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-833c3075d3c521d5940d30341dda1c33537c23b65f1a3f1d9adfcf6f8e5d382f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2123990427/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2123990427?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11688,12861,27924,27925,34775,36060,44200,44363,74728,74895</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Anthony</creatorcontrib><title>Should Scientific Research Involving Decapod Crustaceans Require Ethical Review?</title><title>Journal of agricultural &amp; environmental ethics</title><addtitle>J Agric Environ Ethics</addtitle><description>Decapod crustaceans are faceless animals with five pairs of legs, an external skeleton and multiple nerve centres (ganglia) rather than a single brain (as in vertebrates). They include common seafood species such as crayfish, crabs, lobsters, prawns and shrimp. These characteristics make them difficult to empathise with and consequently legal protection of decapods ranges from strong (Norway and New Zealand), through circumstantial (Australia and Italy) to non-existent (in many other countries). Whether they are capable of experiencing pain depends on definitions and the requirement for absolute proof of an inherently subjective psychological experience. Yet like other animals, decapods fulfil neuroanatomical, pharmacological and behavioural criteria that are consistent with a pain response. Whether they experience stress, harm and distress is less controversial because these conditions are more measurable than the pain response. To balance animal welfare concerns with scientific merit whilst providing confidence for the growing public awareness of crustacean welfare, use of decapod crustaceans in research should require ethical review.</description><subject>Agricultural Economics</subject><subject>Anatomy</subject><subject>Animal care</subject><subject>Animal rights movement</subject><subject>Animal welfare</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Brain</subject><subject>Brain architecture</subject><subject>Crabs</subject><subject>Crayfish</subject><subject>Crustacea</subject><subject>Crustaceans</subject><subject>Decapoda</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Environmental ethics</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Evolutionary Biology</subject><subject>Ganglia</subject><subject>Literature reviews</subject><subject>Lobsters</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Pharmacology</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Plant Sciences</subject><subject>Prawns</subject><subject>Public awareness</subject><subject>Research methodology</subject><subject>Review Paper</subject><subject>Scientific method</subject><subject>Seafood</subject><subject>Theory of Medicine/Bioethics</subject><subject>Vertebrates</subject><issn>1187-7863</issn><issn>1573-322X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKs_wNuC52gms7vZPYnUr0JBsQreQsxHm7LutsluxX9vSgVPnmYGnvcdeAg5B3YJjImrCKxiJWVQ0VoUjIoDMoJCIEXO3w_TDpWgoirxmJzEuGKM1RXkI_I8X3ZDY7K59rbtvfM6e7HRqqCX2bTdds3Wt4vs1mq17kw2CUPslbaqjQnbDD7Y7K5feq2adG-9_bo-JUdONdGe_c4xebu_e5080tnTw3RyM6MaoexphaiRicKgLjiYos6ZQYY5GKNAIxYoNMePsnCg0IGplXHala6yKVJxh2Nyse9dh24z2NjLVTeENr2UHDjWNcu5SBTsKR26GIN1ch38pwrfEpjciZN7cTKJkztxcpfh-0xMbLuw4a_5_9AP1mJwVQ</recordid><startdate>20181001</startdate><enddate>20181001</enddate><creator>Rowe, Anthony</creator><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>88H</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8FQ</scope><scope>8FV</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GB0</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2N</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M3G</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20181001</creationdate><title>Should Scientific Research Involving Decapod Crustaceans Require Ethical Review?</title><author>Rowe, Anthony</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-833c3075d3c521d5940d30341dda1c33537c23b65f1a3f1d9adfcf6f8e5d382f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Agricultural Economics</topic><topic>Anatomy</topic><topic>Animal care</topic><topic>Animal rights movement</topic><topic>Animal welfare</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Brain</topic><topic>Brain architecture</topic><topic>Crabs</topic><topic>Crayfish</topic><topic>Crustacea</topic><topic>Crustaceans</topic><topic>Decapoda</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Environmental ethics</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Evolutionary Biology</topic><topic>Ganglia</topic><topic>Literature reviews</topic><topic>Lobsters</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Pharmacology</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Plant Sciences</topic><topic>Prawns</topic><topic>Public awareness</topic><topic>Research methodology</topic><topic>Review Paper</topic><topic>Scientific method</topic><topic>Seafood</topic><topic>Theory of Medicine/Bioethics</topic><topic>Vertebrates</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Rowe, Anthony</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Complete</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>Religion Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Canadian Business &amp; Current Affairs Database</collection><collection>Canadian Business &amp; Current Affairs Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>DELNET Social Sciences &amp; Humanities Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Art, Design &amp; Architecture Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Agriculture Science Database</collection><collection>Arts &amp; Humanities Database</collection><collection>Religion Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>CBCA Reference &amp; Current Events</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>One Business (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of agricultural &amp; environmental ethics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Rowe, Anthony</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Should Scientific Research Involving Decapod Crustaceans Require Ethical Review?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of agricultural &amp; environmental ethics</jtitle><stitle>J Agric Environ Ethics</stitle><date>2018-10-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>625</spage><epage>634</epage><pages>625-634</pages><issn>1187-7863</issn><eissn>1573-322X</eissn><abstract>Decapod crustaceans are faceless animals with five pairs of legs, an external skeleton and multiple nerve centres (ganglia) rather than a single brain (as in vertebrates). They include common seafood species such as crayfish, crabs, lobsters, prawns and shrimp. These characteristics make them difficult to empathise with and consequently legal protection of decapods ranges from strong (Norway and New Zealand), through circumstantial (Australia and Italy) to non-existent (in many other countries). Whether they are capable of experiencing pain depends on definitions and the requirement for absolute proof of an inherently subjective psychological experience. Yet like other animals, decapods fulfil neuroanatomical, pharmacological and behavioural criteria that are consistent with a pain response. Whether they experience stress, harm and distress is less controversial because these conditions are more measurable than the pain response. To balance animal welfare concerns with scientific merit whilst providing confidence for the growing public awareness of crustacean welfare, use of decapod crustaceans in research should require ethical review.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Netherlands</pub><doi>10.1007/s10806-018-9750-7</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1187-7863
ispartof Journal of agricultural & environmental ethics, 2018-10, Vol.31 (5), p.625-634
issn 1187-7863
1573-322X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2123990427
source Business Source Ultimate; Art, Design & Architecture Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); ABI/INFORM Global; Springer Nature
subjects Agricultural Economics
Anatomy
Animal care
Animal rights movement
Animal welfare
Animals
Brain
Brain architecture
Crabs
Crayfish
Crustacea
Crustaceans
Decapoda
Education
Environmental ethics
Ethics
Evolutionary Biology
Ganglia
Literature reviews
Lobsters
Pain
Pharmacology
Philosophy
Plant Sciences
Prawns
Public awareness
Research methodology
Review Paper
Scientific method
Seafood
Theory of Medicine/Bioethics
Vertebrates
title Should Scientific Research Involving Decapod Crustaceans Require Ethical Review?
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T02%3A51%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Should%20Scientific%20Research%20Involving%20Decapod%20Crustaceans%20Require%20Ethical%20Review?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20agricultural%20&%20environmental%20ethics&rft.au=Rowe,%20Anthony&rft.date=2018-10-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=625&rft.epage=634&rft.pages=625-634&rft.issn=1187-7863&rft.eissn=1573-322X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10806-018-9750-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2123990427%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c316t-833c3075d3c521d5940d30341dda1c33537c23b65f1a3f1d9adfcf6f8e5d382f3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2123990427&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true