Share thisProviding consistent and repeatable water quality will instill confidence that the water remained the same and within specification for the duration of your study.
The composition of water will influence research results. Regarding the potential effects of a variable water quality on the repeatability of a research project, I would offer the following comments and reference provided by Dr. Tim Martin, Director, Animal Care Program, St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, USA.
I feel it is imperative that our industry establish quality standards for drinking water. The only requirement at this time is for the “potable, uncontaminated drinking water” [from the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals]. The problem with this statement is the variability in the mineral and chemical content from state to state, city to city, and institution to institution. This difference can directly affect the outcome or repeatability of research projects. An example of this can be found in an article from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA (2003 Sep 16; 100(19): 11065-9) entitled “Trace amounts of copper in water induce amyloid plaques and learning deficits in a rabbit model of Alzheimer's disease”. The level of copper present in drinking water affected the quality of the Alzheimer’s model. Some of the original work on this model was conducted at an AAALAC accredited facility where the rabbits received their water from an automated watering system. The source of the water was the municipal supply. The drinking water was routinely tested for impurities and bacterial contamination and the results were always within the established [US] EPA standards. The animals developed plaques as expected. When the project was moved to another institution 25 miles away, the rabbits did not respond the same. They had developed fewer plaques. The only difference was the source of water. At the second institution, all the animals were given distilled bottled water.
Both institutions adhere to the current standards for animal husbandry; however just one minimal difference in husbandry practice greatly affected the outcome of a research project.