Evidence-based severity assessment: Impact of repeated versus single open-field testing on welfare in C57BL/6J mice

•Current guidelines on animal experiments require a prospective severity assessment.•Effects of repeated versus single open-field testing on mouse welfare were studied.•Endocrinological, physical and behavioral indicators of welfare were assessed.•Varying testing experiences did not cause significant differences in any parameter.•Thus, no signs of poor welfare were detected after repeated open-field testing.

According to current guidelines on animal experiments, a prospective assessment of the severity of each procedure is mandatory. However, so far, the classification of procedures into different severity categories mainly relies on theoretic considerations, since it is not entirely clear which of the various procedures compromise the welfare of animals, or, to what extent. Against this background, a systematic empirical investigation of the impact of each procedure, including behavioral testing, seems essential. Therefore, the present study was designed to elucidate the effects of repeated versus single testing on mouse welfare, using one of the most commonly used paradigms for behavioral phenotyping in behavioral neuroscience, the open-field test. In an independent groups design, laboratory mice (Mus musculus f. domestica) experienced either repeated, single, or no open-field testing - procedures that are assigned to different severity categories. Interestingly, testing experiences did not affect fecal corticosterone metabolites, body weights, elevated plus-maze or home cage behavior differentially. Thus, with respect to the assessed endocrinological, physical, and behavioral outcome measures, no signs of compromised welfare could be detected in mice that were tested in the open-field repeatedly, once, or, not at all. These findings challenge current classification guidelines and may, furthermore, stimulate systematic research on the severity of single procedures involving living animals.