SERDAR İZMİRLİ

Determining the scientific contribution of the studies with cats and dogs in veterinary Science in the concept of animal ethics

Bu araştırma pet hayvanlarının (kedi ve köpek) bilimsel çalışmalarda hangi düzeyde kullanıldığını ve bilime katkılarını belirlemek amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Çalışmada “ISI Web of Science” veri tabanından yararlanılmış ve 1997-2006 yılları arası araştırılmıştır. Veteriner bilimleri alanında dünyada 4.405 çalışmanın yapıldığı ve bu çalışmaların %30’unun kedilere ve 70’inin ise köpeklere ait olduğu bulunmuştur. Belirtilen tarihlerde Türkiye’de kedi ve köpekle ilgili 99 çalışma yapılmış ve bu rakam tüm dünyada yapılan çalışmaların %2.24’ünü oluşturmuştur. Bu çalışmaların %27’si kediler, %73’ü ise köpeklerle yapılmıştır. Dünyada kedilerle yapılan çalışmaların aldığı ortalama atıf sayısı 4.00 olurken, köpeklerle yapılan çalışmaların ortalama atıf sayısı 4.13 olarak belirlenmiştir. Dünyada kedi ve köpekle yapılan çalışmaların ortalama atıf sayıları birbirine yakın değerlerde bulunmuşken Türkiye’de köpeklerle yapılan çalışmaların aldığı ortalama atıf sayısı 1.90 ve kedilerle yapılan çalışmaların ortalama atıf sayısı 0.96 olarak bulunmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

veteriner bilimleri, bilim adamları, kedi, veri tabanı, köpek, yayınlar

Veteriner bilimleri alanında kedi ve köpeklerle yapılan çalışmaların bilime katkısının hayvan kullanım etiği kapsamında belirlenmesi

This study was conducted to give information about cats and dogs in the use of scientific research and the contributions to the science. The “ISI Web of Science” database was used and the study investigated companion animals in a 10 year period from1997-2006. It was found that there where 4.405 publications made in the world by scientists related to dogs and cats in veterinaryscience. The proportion of cats and dogs investigated in these publications where 30% and 70%, respectively. In this time period 99 studies were conducted about cats and dogs, in Turkey. The proportion of studies which were made in Turkey has beenconsisted the whole of 2.24% at the world. The 27% of these were by cats and 73% of those were with dogs. The average citationsof the studies on cats and dogs were 4.00 and 4.13, respectively, in the world. Although the studies relatively appeared similar inproportion in the world, the averages of dogs (1.90) was approximately double of the averages of cats (0.96), in Turkey.

Keywords:

veterinary science, scientists, cats, databases, dogs, publications,

PDF

___

1.Murray JK, Browne WJ, Roberts MA, Whitmarsh A, Gruff ydd-Jones TJ: Number and ownership profiles of cats and dogs in the UK. Vet Rec, 166 (6): 163-168, 2010.
2.Perrin T: The Business of urban animals survey: The facts and statistics on companion animals in Canada. Can Vet J, 50 (1): 48-52, 2009.
3.NHMRC: Nhmrc guidelines on the care of dogs used for scientific purposes. 2009. htt p://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_fi les_nhmrc/ file/health_ethics/animal/ea24_guidelines_care_of_cats.pdf. Accessed: 03.03.2010.
4.Bate M: The dog as an experimental animal. ANZCCART News, 10 (1): 1-8, 1997.
5.Crawford RL: A review of the animal welfare enforcement report data 1973 through 1995. Animal Welfare Informati on Center Newslett er, 7 (2): 1-12, 1996.
6.Fenwick N, Griffin G, Gauthier C: The welfare of animals used in science: How the “Three Rs” ethic guides improvements. Can Vet J, 50 (5): 523-530, 2009.
7.Obora S, Kurosawa T: Implementation of the three rs in biomedical research - has the turn of the century turned the tide?. Atla-Altern Lab Anim, 37 (2): 197-207, 2009.
8.Asan A: SCI-Expanded, SSCI, AHCI and impact factor. Proceedings of 3. National Symposium, Turkey, pp. 221-263, 2005.
9.Home Office: Statistics of scientific procedures on living animals, Great Britain (2000). htt p://www.archive.offi cial-documents.co.uk/ document/cm52/5244/524402.pdf.2001. Accessed: 03.03.2010.
10.Home Office: Statistics of scientific procedures on living animals, Great Britain (2005). http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/ spanimals05.pdf. 2006. Accessed: 03.03.2010.
11.Zhao S, Liu E, Chu Y, Zheng H, Kitajima S, Morimoto M: Numbers of publications related to laboratory animals. Scand J Lab Anim Sci, 34 (2):81-86, 2007.
12.De Greve P, De Leeuw W: Developments in alternatives and animal use in Europe, proceedings of the 2nd world congress on alternatives and animal use in the life sciences, Nedherlands, pp. 127-136, 1996.
13.Eddy-Kulpa J, Snyder M, Stokes W: A review of trends in animal use in the United States (1972-2006). Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Alternatives & Animal Use in the Life Sciences –Review progress made toward the 3Rs, Tokyo-Japan, pp. 163-165, 2008.
14.Spielmann H, Grune B, Liebsch M, Seiler A, Vogel R: Mission and accomplishments of ZEBET, the national centre for alternati ves in Germany at the BfR (Federal Institute for Risk Assesment). Proceedings of the 6th World Congress on Alternatives & Animal Use in the Life Sciences - Review progress made toward the 3Rs, Tokyo-Japan, pp. 4146, 2008.
15.Das RG, Fry D, Preziosi R, Hudson M: Planning for reduction. Atla-Altern Lab Anim, 37 (1): 27-32, 2009.
16.Garfield E, Welljams-Dorof A: Of Nobel class: A citati on perspective on high impact research authors. Theor Med, 13 (2): 117-135, 1992.