posted
If what is meant is use of animals to investigate environmental, physical, medical, emotional, and behavioral influences, a narrower search keyword reveals an enormous information trove. "Animal testing" is such a keyword. Then the trove's information organization is by narrower keyword detail.
Say species tested and why, purpose of test, subject of test, location of test, identity of investigator and entity.
Say rhesus macaques, their cognitive aptitudes are close to humans', test adaptive situational awareness ability, mazes subject, Morgan Island Preserve, South Carolina, Drs. Dame, Sir, Miss, and Mister of the Random Primate University, physical sciences college, ergonomics program.
In short, like any topic, animal testing is organized by a library catalog system and as well bibliography system: some by physical sciences attribution systems, some by social sciences attribution systems.
How the content is filed generally otherwise is through a peer review process, ethical research review, and then submitted for publication in science journals if indicated.
posted
Each specimen is numbered or named according to a particular sciences' conventions and the numerical number of specimens and locations tested.
Social sciences human tests, for example, use alias first names and an alpha sequential numerical code. Test group A, specimen number 0176. Jane, A-0176. Group B is often a different variable or a control group. Group C, different variable, etc. Always a control group for any scientific method investigation.
Animal test or other biological specimens are usually unnamed, usually labeled by location sampled from, site A, clinic C, for examples. Or an abbreviation of a site, similar to general abbreviation conventions. ATL might mean Atlantic, PAC for Pacific, for example.
The general alpha, sequential numeric conventions apply to all, though if a sample group is uniform for variables, just sequential numbers are assigned. The number signals roughly how many specimens are anticipated: one digit, two digits, three digits, etc. If the number of test groups exceeds twenty-six, the next set is two-place or more alpha labels: AA, BA . . . BBZ, etc.
In any case, a legend of terms and terminologies and a master list inventory are parts of a specimen test sample process and report.
For fiction purposes, perhaps a specimen label nomenclature might do double or more duty, an authentic label system for verisimilitude's sake, a label that has one or more subtext meanings, and is brief and memorable, for example.
Say a macaque specimen in a behavioral trial, maybe a given name, an alpha group, and number, includes possibly a Roman numeral. Otto B-IV!? Bee U-2. And so on. The name personalizes the monkey as human-like and associable for readers. However, humanizing animal test specimens is generally frowned upon.
On the other hand, researchers resort to clever-cute, imaginative labeling that staves off the tedium and boredom and will use names anyway, informally or formally, because they are human and names are more memorable than codes.
posted
I'd like to offer another perspective based on my own experience with this.
During my junior year of college, I did an internship at Harvard Medical School (yes I was a really big nerd and going through a biochemistry phase). The professor I interned under was studying the effects of diet on mice and rats. I hope this doesn't offend any animal-rights folks on this board...but this is my experience and I will share it. They were kept in small, individual cages that were stacked on top of each other, perhaps ten or so high, and there were as many as 20 or 30 columns of cages. Maybe more, I don't remember. So, that's a lot of rats in one place. Interestingly, it did not smell at all. It was the sound they made that was most disturbing. Each one was tracked using a system not unlike the Dewey Decimal system, complete with color coding. I don't know if we were following a standard practice or if the professor had invented his own methodology. I don't think it was the one extrinsic detailed above.
However, it is worthy to note that once an experimental result stood out it was given a completely new and unique identification. And the designation was always fun. I think we had a Viola and Orsino at one point. And even now, many years later as an engineer in a completely different discipline, we will differentiate singular experiments with boring alpha-numerics and other such indicators, but whenever an amazing discovery is made we will rename it something with pizzazz. There are names like "Platypus," "iDip,"The Continuum," and "Dragon Seed." I think you get the idea.
Lots of Star Trek references Posts: 82 | Registered: May 2016
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
