Animal Science Practice Test

[Neomi Bensch]

The following links are practice quizzes based on typical livestock skillathon stations. While these may not be the exact questions or stations used in skillathon, they are a great way to practice and review material! Simply click on the practice test you want to take the link will take you to a Qualtrics quiz. You can complete these as many times as you wish. Correct answers are given throughout the survey to test your knowledge. Special thanks to Madison and Wayne County 4-H.

Animal Science encompasses the study of animal systems and livestock management, use and care of animal health-care instruments, animal grooming equipment, animal restraining equipment, and laboratory equipment.

Certifications were developed through comprehensive needs assessments and job analysis within the agriculture industry. AEST Certifications are meeting industry needs by identifying workers with specific, employer-demanded knowledge, skills and abilities to support hiring practices and fill the gap in employment needs.

Industry partners have identified the industry readiness indicators that are measured on the Animal Science certification exam. Based on the industry needs and assessment of each indicator, the number of exam items per area have been determined and are noted on the exam guide. Additionally, where applicable, the industry readiness indicators have been correlated with current educational frameworks.

Exams are delivered online and must be administered by an approved AEST proctor. Candidates have a two-hour window during a single session to complete the exam. Exams are 100 questions in length and include multiple choice options for all items. Candidates are required to achieve a passing score on the exam to earn certification. Reduced price retake exams are available to candidates who do not meet the minimum passing score on the initial attempt.

The protection and welfare of animals is a priority for the EU. This includes wildlife, zoo animals, farm animals, animals in transport and animals used for scientific purposes. Regarding animals in science, EU legislation is unique as it sets a final goal of full replacement of all animals used for scientific and educational purposes and is taking concrete action towards that goal.

Studies that still need to be carried out on animals must be done in compliance with specific regulations that aim to improve the welfare of those animals. This includes studies on increasing the basic understanding of human or animal biology, developing or producing new medicines, physiological studies, environmental effects or testing chemicals or new food additives.

The first Directive for the protection of animals in science was adopted in 1986 and was replaced by Directive 2010/63/EU. Regulation (EU)2019/1010 introduced a new level of transparency to help progress towards eventually replacing animal use in science. The amendments have been incorporated in the consolidated text of the Directive.

Replacement can be defined as methods, strategies or approaches that do not involve the use of live animals. Reduction covers any approach that will result in fewer animals being used to achieve the same objective. Refinement signifies the modification of any procedures or practices from the time the experimental animal is born until its death to minimise its suffering and enhance its well-being, or by moving from species that are considered more sentient to those less sentient.

A regulatory acceptance of alternative methods is required internationally if true reduction in animal use is to be delivered. To that end, the Commission is actively promoting alternative approaches on international fora such as OECD, ICH and VICH, as well as during bilateral discussions with third countries.

Moreover, the International Cooperation on Alternative Test Methods (ICATM) includes governmental organisations from the EU, the US, Japan, Canada, South Korea, Brazil and China. It aims at promoting enhanced international cooperation and coordination on the scientific development, validation and regulatory use of alternative approaches.

The Partnership is a voluntary collaboration between the European Commission, European trade associations, and companies from seven industry sectors. The partners are committed to pooling knowledge and resources to accelerate the development, validation and acceptance of alternative approaches to further the "Three Rs" in regulatory testing.

The Network provides support for EURL ECVAM validation studies aimed at assessing the reliability and relevance of alternative methods that have a potential to replace, reduce or refine the use of animals for scientific purposes.

Various relevant EU regulatory agencies, including EFSA, ECHA and EMA , together with the Member States, constitute the Preliminary Assessment of Regulatory Relevance network, known as PARERE. EURL ECVAM systematically consults the Network on the proposed alternative approaches and strategies.

The primary role of the Committee is to carry out high-quality independent peer reviews on validation studies to assess the scientific validity of test methods and specify the capacity and limitations of the proposed methods. The outcomes of the ESAC peer reviews are published as "ESAC Opinions."

Member States submitted their implementation reports to the Commission, see the EU Survey questionnaire and the Member State submissions to the EU Survey. Additional information complementing the submissions is also available: Annex - Part I - MS additional submissions and Annex - Part II - MS additional submissions.

As required by the Directive, a review of the Directive was undertaken in 2017. The Review Report COM(2017) 631 is accompanied by a Commission Staff Working Document SWD(2017) 353. The Staff Working Document provides further insight and contains several recommendations for different stakeholders, with the common aim of improving the attainment of the objectives of the Directive.

The capture of non-human primates from the wild gives rise to animal welfare, health, and ethical concerns. To end the capturing of animals from the wild for both scientific and breeding purposes, the Directive has set as one of its aims to allow, after an appropriate transition period, only the use of non-human primates that are the offspring of animals which have themselves been bred in captivity, or that are sourced from self-sustaining colonies.

A feasibility study (2017) was conducted to consider progress towards this aim. Considering the current and projected demand and supply of the non-human primate species used, and impacts on the animal welfare and health, the conclusions of the feasibility study do not support altering the dates set out in the Directive.

A second feasibility study (2022) concludes that at this time, it is not possible to determine if or whether the aspiration of sourcing non-human primates only from self-sustaining colonies will be achieved in the future. With the recent changes in use, availability, demand and breeding practices in some centres, it is unlikely to be achieved for all commonly used non-human primate species in the foreseeable future.

The Commission also provides an annual summary report of the data submitted by Member States. These data provide an improved understanding of where and how animals are still used in science today and will help identify areas in which efforts for the development and validation of alternative approaches need to be intensified.

The first EU summary report, under Directive 2010/63/EU, on the statistics on the use of animals for scientific purposes by the Member States of the Union covers data from three years, 2015-2017. From 2018 onwards, EU summary reports will be published annually.

The Directive requires all Member States to establish a national committee for the protection on animals in science. The National Committee advises competent authorities and animal welfare bodies, exchange information and share best practises within the EU.

It is important that the Directive on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes is implemented correctly. Therefore guidance material has been developed to help all stakeholders apply the principle of the Directive correctly. These publications aim to significantly improve animal welfare and science by enhancing a common understanding of the Directive's provisions across all Member States of the EU.

A catalogue of published guidance, provided to the Commission by National Committees has been prepared. The content of the guidance provided by Member State National Committees does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Only the Court of Justice of the European Union is entitled to interpret EU law with legally binding authority.

Many different species are used around the world, but the most common include mice, fish, rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, farm animals, birds, cats, dogs, mini-pigs, and non-human primates (monkeys, and in some countries, chimpanzees). Video: Watch what scientists have to say about alternatives to animal testing.

It is estimated that more than 115 million animals worldwide are used in laboratory experiments every year. But because only a small proportion of countries collect and publish data concerning animal use for testing and research, the precise number is unknown. For example, in the United States, up to 90 percent of the animals used in laboratories (purpose-bred rats, mice and birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles and invertebrates) are excluded from the official statistics, meaning that figures published by the U.S. Department of Agriculture are no doubt a substantial underestimate.

Trying to mirror human diseases or toxicity by artificially creating symptoms in mice, dogs or monkeys has major scientific limitations that cannot be overcome. Very often the symptoms and responses to potential treatments seen in other species are dissimilar to those of human patients. As a consequence, nine out of every 10 candidate medicines that appear safe and effective in animal studies fail when given to humans. Drug failures and research that never delivers because of irrelevant animal models not only delay medical progress, but also waste resources and risk the health and safety of volunteers in clinical trials.

c80f0f1006