参照动物福利国际标准,规范兽医临床实践教学

兽医临床实验实训教学在兽医临床课程体系中占有重要地位,而实验动物在教学中起到重要的支撑作用,要在保证实验实训教学质量和学生实践能力培养的基础上,同时兼顾实验动物福利。本文阐述了兽医临床实验实训教学的特点、动物福利的内涵与应用意义及动物福利在教学中的应用,为能在保证教学要求的同时更合理使用实验动物提供参考。     

养犬问答

在城市,大多数人养犬是为了增添生活乐趣。而不同品种的犬,都有各自不同的特点,所以选择合适品种的犬,是家庭养犬至关重要的。     

养犬问答

什么是犬的假孕？母犬会出现假孕现象。母犬在发情后1个月或排卵后,母犬腹部增大,乳房也出现妊娠时的类似变化。这种现象可出现多次。甚至在未经交配的处女犬中也可发生。这种症状可持续1个月或更长时间。在一段时间内常不发生行为学上的变化。一些母犬,乳房变化明显,甚至可挤出乳汁,此外。腹部症状也很明显,常会误认为已经怀孕。但在临近分娩日期时,     

Journal standards

Abstract

Despite its many imperfections, the peer review process is a firmly established quality control system for scientific literature. It gives readers some assurance that the work and views that are reported meet standards that are acceptable to a journal. Maureen Revington’s editorial in a recent issue of the Australian Veterinary Journal (Revington 2002 Revington, ML. 2002. Peer review — What is it? Why use it?. Australian Veterinary Journal, 80: 604–5.  [Google Scholar]) gives a good concise “warts and all” overview of the process and is well worth reading.     

Journal standards

Despite its many imperfections, the peer review process is a firmly established quality control system for scientific literature. It gives readers some assurance that the work and views that are reported meet standards that are acceptable to a journal. Maureen Revington's editorial in a recent issue of the Australian Veterinary Journal (Revington2002) gives a good concise warts and all overview of the process and is well worth reading. I have some concerns about several articles in the December 2002 issue of the New Zealand Veterinary Journal (Volume 50, Number 6), devoted to the health and welfare of farmed deer, that relate to extensive citing of non-peer reviewed papers. I can understand the need for information to flow from researchers to the wider community but that need is already satisfied by publications such as the proceedings of the Deer Branch of the New Zealand Veterinary Association and Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production. Non-peer reviewed papers have been cited in the Journal in the past but never to the extent displayed in this particular issue. It degrades the peer-review process and creates an added burden for reviewers who are forced to grapple with the uncertainties of the science in non-peer reviewed citations. One of my fears is that this process allows science from non peer reviewed articles to be legitimised by its inclusion in a peer reviewed journal and perhaps go on to be accepted as dogma. This is a real danger given the difficulties associated with tracing back to original citations and the increasing volume of scientific literature. It also affords opportunities for agencies to pick up questionable and doubtful science and tout it as support for their products or particular points of view. If deer researchers choose to publish most of their work in proceedings then so be it. However this approach, which seems to becoming increasingly prevalent in the deer sector, is questionable from an established science point of view. For my part, I am increasingly reluctant to spend time reading non-peer reviewed material, despite its appeal. At present there are two distinct baskets for scientific literature, one for non-reviewed articles and another for peer reviewed information. I would sincerely hope that we are not going to need another basket as a halfway house for issues that fall in between that classification.