Animal use protocol submission tips

Helpful tips for submitting a protocol for ethics review

An application, or Animal Use Protocol (AUP), must be completed by researchers or instructors who plan to use live non-human vertebrate animals in research or teaching projects. The Animal Care Committee (ACC) reviews and approves all AUPs before the study begins. Applications are submitted via our research ethics system and reviewed by the ACC monthly (except August). 

Merit review information

Any application that has not undergone a peer review through a granting agency or is not funded will need to undergo a scientific merit review before an ethics review is conducted by the ACC (See ACC016 - Review process for scientific merit and pedagogical merit).

Pedagogical merit reviews are also required for teaching projects.

Researchers and instructors need to allow additional time for the merit review process (4–6 weeks) before the ACC ethics review of the project. This timeline may vary depending on the number of reviews underway and the availability of reviewers.

Pedagogical merit review of teaching protocols using animals

For teaching courses only.

In the case of an undergraduate or graduate level project or labs involving the use of animals, the lab or project must be reviewed by a merit review committee consisting of individuals familiar with the use of animals in research or teaching and knowledge of pedagogy and of alternatives to animal-based teaching that will attest to the educational merit and learning objectives/outcomes of the project or lab. Further details about this process can be obtained from the manager of research ethics.

Scientific merit review of research using animals

If a research project has not undergone prior peer review through sponsoring agencies (e.g., student research, contract research, pilot study, etc.), the application must be reviewed for scientific merit before submission to the ACC for an ethics review.

Scientific merit review is conducted by a merit review committee consisting of expert independent reviewers. Further details about this process can be obtained from the manager of research ethics. 

Tips for completing an application

Please check back regularly for new tips!

Lay summary:

  • Please include a summary (approximately 250 words) of the project written for the public. Any technical terms should be explained clearly so that individuals not familiar with the research can understand them. 

Pilot study:

  • Pilot studies are protocols that use a limited number of animals for a limited period.
  • They are conducted when novel studies and/or procedures are proposed and can help to identify and define humane endpoints, refine techniques, demonstrate feasibility, and/or provide a justification for proceeding with larger experiments (see ACC034: Definition of a pilot study).

People:

  • All personnel who will be involved in the use of animals must be listed in the People section and upload their GoSignMeUp (GSMU) animal training record.

Keywords:

  • For the Keywords section, please see the list below and upload 6–8 keywords for CCAC reporting purposes. 
General
  • research, teaching, training, testing
  • regulation (are the experiments performed directly in relation to testing regulations in force in Canada and/or the U.S. (FDA, EPA, etc.) and/or elsewhere, type of testing (e.g., cosmetic testing)
  • field work, behaviour observation, environmental protection study, fauna conservation
  • development of techniques, study of the effectiveness of a product (drugs, others) or a method (spectroscopy, others)
  • breeding, breeding colony, sentinel program
  • antibody production (monoclonal, polyclonal)
  • pilot study
  • palatability test, digestibility test
  • reinforcement/motivation, staged behavioural encounters
  • primary cell culture, tissue/organ collection, graft, transplant
  • species name (i.e., rats, mice, fish), transgenic animal
  • validation of non-animal model (in vitro test, computational methods, etc.)
Procedures
  • trapping/netting
  • marking/tagging
  • injection (intravenous, subcutaneous, intramuscular, intraperitoneal)
  • blood sampling/testing (small volume), blood removal (large volume)
  • gavaging
  • physical restraint
  • infection induction
  • whole-body radiation
  • physical euthanasia
  • food or water deprivation
  • special diet
  • altered environmental exposure
  • physical restraint (duration)
Agents
  • radioisotope administration
  • chemical exposure
  • infectious agents
  • immunogenic or inflammatory agents
  • Freund’s complete adjuvant
Surgery
  • major surgery
  • minor surgery
  • stereotaxic surgery
  • survival surgery
  • multiple surgeries, cannulation

Conflict of interest:

A conflict of interest (COI) can be real, perceived, or potential, and it is not inherently bad; however, it should be disclosed regardless of the magnitude of the COI. Please refer to the updated Conflict of Interest guidelines to consider if any member of your team has a COI. If you have any questions, please get in touch with the manager of research ethics.

Justification of numbers (Statistics):

Methods and procedures section:

  • Ensure the ACC has enough information to be aware of all procedures and include the timing, frequency and duration. Flow charts indicating group numbers are strongly recommended to facilitate an easier review. 
  • Standard operating procedures (SOPs) need to be listed in the procedural table (identified with SOP# and title).
  • SOPs are available for researchers and instructors and are located on the Animal Users Teams site.  If you do not have access to this MS Teams site, please email oreaupp@uwaterloo.ca. Please check this site regularly as new and revised SOPs are uploaded regularly after ACC approval. 
  • Any procedures that do not have an existing SOP, researchers can upload a draft SOP that can be reviewed by the ACC.

Please keep in mind the ACC meeting dates and submission deadlines when planning your study.

If you have any questions regarding this process, please get in touch with the manager of research ethics for assistance.