Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.3.008
A. Ruet, C. Arnould, J. Lemarchand, C. Parias, N. Mach, M. Moisan, A. Foury, C. Briant, L. Lansade
Domesticated horses ( Equus caballus) can be exposed to a compromised welfare state and detecting a deterioration in welfare is essential to modify the animals' living conditions appropriately. This study focused on four categories of behavioural indicators, as markers of poor welfare: stereotypies, aggressiveness towards humans, unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. In the scientific literature, at least three assessment methods can be used to evaluate them: the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol, behavioural observations using scans and surveys. The question remains as to whether all these three methods allow an effective assessment of the four categories of behavioural indicators. To address this issue, the repeatability at a three-month interval and convergent validity of each measure (correlations between methods) were investigated on 202 horses housed in loose boxes. Overall, the repeatability and convergent validity were limited, highlighting the difficulty in assessing these indicators in horses. However, stereotypies and aggressiveness measures showed higher repeatability and convergent validity than those of unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. Behavioural observations using scans enabled the four categories of behavioural indicators to be detected more effectively. Suggestions of improvements are proposed for one-off measures such as those performed with the AWIN protocol. Regardless of the assessment method, very limited correlations were observed between the four categories of behavioural indicators, suggesting that they should all be included in a set of indicators used to assess the welfare state of horses, in conjunction with physiological and health measures.
{"title":"Horse welfare: A joint assessment of four categories of behavioural indicators using the AWIN protocol, scan sampling and surveys","authors":"A. Ruet, C. Arnould, J. Lemarchand, C. Parias, N. Mach, M. Moisan, A. Foury, C. Briant, L. Lansade","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.008","url":null,"abstract":"Domesticated horses ( Equus caballus) can be exposed to a compromised welfare state and detecting a deterioration in welfare is essential to modify the animals' living conditions appropriately. This study focused on four categories of behavioural indicators, as markers of poor\u0000 welfare: stereotypies, aggressiveness towards humans, unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. In the scientific literature, at least three assessment methods can be used to evaluate them: the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol, behavioural observations using scans and\u0000 surveys. The question remains as to whether all these three methods allow an effective assessment of the four categories of behavioural indicators. To address this issue, the repeatability at a three-month interval and convergent validity of each measure (correlations between methods) were\u0000 investigated on 202 horses housed in loose boxes. Overall, the repeatability and convergent validity were limited, highlighting the difficulty in assessing these indicators in horses. However, stereotypies and aggressiveness measures showed higher repeatability and convergent validity than\u0000 those of unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. Behavioural observations using scans enabled the four categories of behavioural indicators to be detected more effectively. Suggestions of improvements are proposed for one-off measures such as those performed with the AWIN protocol.\u0000 Regardless of the assessment method, very limited correlations were observed between the four categories of behavioural indicators, suggesting that they should all be included in a set of indicators used to assess the welfare state of horses, in conjunction with physiological and health measures.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90625771","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-01DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.4.002
S. Camenzind, M. Eggel
William Russell and Rex Burch's 3Rs principles were developed 1959 before animal ethics emerged as a scientific discipline in the 1970s and before many ground-breaking developments in modern biotechnology, such as genetic engineering. From this starting point we sought to analyse the normative foundations of the 3Rs principles in contemporary terms and concepts of animal ethics. After establishing the normative groundwork of the 3Rs, we will look at their practical implications within the context of present-day biotechnology. To this end, we shall investigate whether the genetic disenhancement of research animals to limit their ability to feel pain (GPD) complies with the original 3Rs principles. We use GPD as a practical example, since it is being discussed today as a promising way of solving one of the key moral issues raised by animal research, notably animal pain and suffering. By discussing GPD in the context of the 3Rs we aim also not only to gain insights into whether GPD is compatible with one or more of the 3Rs, but also to develop a better understanding of the specific normative foundation of the 3Rs principles and the conceptual limitations and practical implications of that foundation. We argue that reducing moral concerns about animal research to those that are intelligible within a sentientist framework (eg harm and suffering), as the 3Rs do, represents an oversimplification of the moral issues involved. We suggest that interference with abilities, instrumentalisation, flourishing, and death are all important aspects of animal ethics requiring consideration.
{"title":"The 3Rs principles and genetic pain disenhancement","authors":"S. Camenzind, M. Eggel","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.4.002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.4.002","url":null,"abstract":"William Russell and Rex Burch's 3Rs principles were developed 1959 before animal ethics emerged as a scientific discipline in the 1970s and before many ground-breaking developments in modern biotechnology, such as genetic engineering. From this starting point we sought to analyse the\u0000 normative foundations of the 3Rs principles in contemporary terms and concepts of animal ethics. After establishing the normative groundwork of the 3Rs, we will look at their practical implications within the context of present-day biotechnology. To this end, we shall investigate whether the\u0000 genetic disenhancement of research animals to limit their ability to feel pain (GPD) complies with the original 3Rs principles. We use GPD as a practical example, since it is being discussed today as a promising way of solving one of the key moral issues raised by animal research, notably\u0000 animal pain and suffering. By discussing GPD in the context of the 3Rs we aim also not only to gain insights into whether GPD is compatible with one or more of the 3Rs, but also to develop a better understanding of the specific normative foundation of the 3Rs principles and the conceptual\u0000 limitations and practical implications of that foundation. We argue that reducing moral concerns about animal research to those that are intelligible within a sentientist framework (eg harm and suffering), as the 3Rs do, represents an oversimplification of the moral issues involved. We suggest\u0000 that interference with abilities, instrumentalisation, flourishing, and death are all important aspects of animal ethics requiring consideration.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73085917","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.4.006
D. Grumett, A. Butterworth
The available methods of electric shock control or containment of farmed animals are increasing and potentially include: (i) fixed and movable electric fencing; (ii) cattle trainers; (iii) prods or goads; (iv) wires in poultry barns; (v) dairy collecting yard backing gates; (vi) automated milking systems (milking robots); and (vii) collars linked to virtual fencing and containment systems. Since any electric shock is likely to cause a farmed animal pain, any such control or containment must, to be ethically justifiable, bring clear welfare benefits that cannot be practicably delivered in other ways. Associated areas of welfare concern with ethical implications include the displacement of stockpersons by technology, poor facility design, stray voltage, coercive behavioural change and indirect impacts on human society and values.
{"title":"Electric shock control of farmed animals: Welfare review and ethical critique","authors":"D. Grumett, A. Butterworth","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.4.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.4.006","url":null,"abstract":"The available methods of electric shock control or containment of farmed animals are increasing and potentially include: (i) fixed and movable electric fencing; (ii) cattle trainers; (iii) prods or goads; (iv) wires in poultry barns; (v) dairy collecting yard backing gates; (vi) automated\u0000 milking systems (milking robots); and (vii) collars linked to virtual fencing and containment systems. Since any electric shock is likely to cause a farmed animal pain, any such control or containment must, to be ethically justifiable, bring clear welfare benefits that cannot be practicably\u0000 delivered in other ways. Associated areas of welfare concern with ethical implications include the displacement of stockpersons by technology, poor facility design, stray voltage, coercive behavioural change and indirect impacts on human society and values.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89544995","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.3.001
C. Urita, S. Kusuda, N. Rooney
Owl cafes, where customers view and interact with owls, have become popular in Japan. There are multiple aspects of the environment which may be stressful to nocturnal owls, including lighting, tethering and frequent interactions with humans but, to date, welfare has not been investigated. This preliminary study examines the effects of owl cafes and customers on the physiological stress (faecal corticosterone levels [FCL]) and behaviour of the owls. Seven eagle owls (Bubo bubo ) and two African scops owls (Ptilopsis leucotis), in two cafes, were studied over an eight-day period. Cafe A (n = 5) was closed for one day per week, whilst cafe B (n = 4) was open every day. In cafe A there was higher FCL in owls during open days than closed days suggesting that the conditions on open days increase stress in owls. Eight of nine owls showed evidence of some aversion or avoidance of humans, whilst no affiliative behaviours were observed. The number of visitor interactions was not associated with the level of physiological stress; and when comparing owls, there was a tendency for individual owls with a higher percentage of aversive responses to customers to also have higher FCL. Close human interactions of a negative nature, that result in aversion, may be a significant stressor, but further research is required.
{"title":"Physiological and behavioural assessments of stress levels in owls housed at owl cafes","authors":"C. Urita, S. Kusuda, N. Rooney","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.001","url":null,"abstract":"Owl cafes, where customers view and interact with owls, have become popular in Japan. There are multiple aspects of the environment which may be stressful to nocturnal owls, including lighting, tethering and frequent interactions with humans but, to date, welfare has not been investigated.\u0000 This preliminary study examines the effects of owl cafes and customers on the physiological stress (faecal corticosterone levels [FCL]) and behaviour of the owls. Seven eagle owls (Bubo bubo ) and two African scops owls (Ptilopsis leucotis), in two cafes, were studied over an\u0000 eight-day period. Cafe A (n = 5) was closed for one day per week, whilst cafe B (n = 4) was open every day. In cafe A there was higher FCL in owls during open days than closed days suggesting that the conditions on open days increase stress in owls. Eight of nine owls showed evidence of some\u0000 aversion or avoidance of humans, whilst no affiliative behaviours were observed. The number of visitor interactions was not associated with the level of physiological stress; and when comparing owls, there was a tendency for individual owls with a higher percentage of aversive responses to\u0000 customers to also have higher FCL. Close human interactions of a negative nature, that result in aversion, may be a significant stressor, but further research is required.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84792561","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.3.007
GV Berteselli, S. Messori, L. Arena, L. Smith, P. Dalla Villa, F. De Massis
The European regulatory framework lacks standardisation as regards the minimum requirements for shelter facilities, making defining welfare standards for dogs challenging. Dog (Canis familiaris) welfare assessments should consist of a comprehensive set of measurements that allow the calculation of an overall 'welfare score.' The Shelter Quality protocol was developed for the purpose of assessing shelter dog welfare. The study aims to establish a standardised system for evaluating shelter dog welfare by obtaining agreement from experts on the weighting of different measures contributing to an overall welfare score. The Delphi technique is a widely used method for establishing consensus among experts. Two Delphi procedures were implemented and we compared their effectiveness in achieving expert consensus by evaluating rounds' numbers required to reach consensus and the response and attrition rates. Expert consensus was achieved in Delphi 1 when the standard deviation in the expert weightings was ≤ 5. This was achieved easily for the welfare score weightings of the four principles: 'Good feeding', 'Good housing', 'Good Health', and 'Appropriate behaviour.' Animal-based measures were found to reach consensus more quickly than resource-based measures. In Delphi 2, we used the coefficient of variation to determine consensus. No statistical differences were found between the two Delphi methods for attrition rate, response rate or number of participants. Continuing rounds until a consensus is reached is recommended as this method balances time and participant fatigue. A standardised scoring system is provided, using a single overall score of welfare that can be used to compare welfare standards between shelters.
{"title":"Using a Delphi method to estimate the relevance of indicators for the assessment of shelter dog welfare","authors":"GV Berteselli, S. Messori, L. Arena, L. Smith, P. Dalla Villa, F. De Massis","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.007","url":null,"abstract":"The European regulatory framework lacks standardisation as regards the minimum requirements for shelter facilities, making defining welfare standards for dogs challenging. Dog (Canis familiaris) welfare assessments should consist of a comprehensive set of measurements that allow\u0000 the calculation of an overall 'welfare score.' The Shelter Quality protocol was developed for the purpose of assessing shelter dog welfare. The study aims to establish a standardised system for evaluating shelter dog welfare by obtaining agreement from experts on the weighting of different\u0000 measures contributing to an overall welfare score. The Delphi technique is a widely used method for establishing consensus among experts. Two Delphi procedures were implemented and we compared their effectiveness in achieving expert consensus by evaluating rounds' numbers required to reach\u0000 consensus and the response and attrition rates. Expert consensus was achieved in Delphi 1 when the standard deviation in the expert weightings was ≤ 5. This was achieved easily for the welfare score weightings of the four principles: 'Good feeding', 'Good housing', 'Good Health', and 'Appropriate\u0000 behaviour.' Animal-based measures were found to reach consensus more quickly than resource-based measures. In Delphi 2, we used the coefficient of variation to determine consensus. No statistical differences were found between the two Delphi methods for attrition rate, response rate or number\u0000 of participants. Continuing rounds until a consensus is reached is recommended as this method balances time and participant fatigue. A standardised scoring system is provided, using a single overall score of welfare that can be used to compare welfare standards between shelters.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73204260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.4.004
J. Jerlström, C. Berg, AH Karlsson, A. Wallenbeck, H. Hansson
The relationship between animal welfare at slaughter and slaughterhouse profitability is complex, with potential trade-offs between animal welfare costs and benefits. Slaughterhouses currently lack data support for decisions on investments that can improve both animal welfare and profitability. Therefore, this study mapped the economic impacts for slaughterhouse businesses of improved cattle and pig welfare at slaughter. Specific aims were to: (i) highlight the possible economic impact of animal welfare improvements, based on the scientific literature; (ii) develop an economic model demonstrating the theoretical contribution of animal welfare to slaughterhouse profitability; and (iii) validate the economic model through focus group interviews with slaughterhouse personnel in Sweden. The findings indicated that investing in animal welfare improvements could result in accumulation of an intangible asset that can be considered together with other production factors in the economic model. Model validation stressed the importance of selling by-products for the economic outcome and of smooth workflow for productivity. The study thus improves understanding of the economic impacts of animal welfare at slaughter and incentives for slaughterhouse businesses to improve animal welfare. The results are important for public and private policy-makers interested in enhancing animal welfare at slaughter.
{"title":"A formal model for assessing the economic impact of animal welfare improvements at bovine and porcine slaughter","authors":"J. Jerlström, C. Berg, AH Karlsson, A. Wallenbeck, H. Hansson","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.4.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.4.004","url":null,"abstract":"The relationship between animal welfare at slaughter and slaughterhouse profitability is complex, with potential trade-offs between animal welfare costs and benefits. Slaughterhouses currently lack data support for decisions on investments that can improve both animal welfare and profitability.\u0000 Therefore, this study mapped the economic impacts for slaughterhouse businesses of improved cattle and pig welfare at slaughter. Specific aims were to: (i) highlight the possible economic impact of animal welfare improvements, based on the scientific literature; (ii) develop an economic model\u0000 demonstrating the theoretical contribution of animal welfare to slaughterhouse profitability; and (iii) validate the economic model through focus group interviews with slaughterhouse personnel in Sweden. The findings indicated that investing in animal welfare improvements could result in accumulation\u0000 of an intangible asset that can be considered together with other production factors in the economic model. Model validation stressed the importance of selling by-products for the economic outcome and of smooth workflow for productivity. The study thus improves understanding of the economic\u0000 impacts of animal welfare at slaughter and incentives for slaughterhouse businesses to improve animal welfare. The results are important for public and private policy-makers interested in enhancing animal welfare at slaughter.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88900294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.3.002
M. Tokareva, Jasmine S Brown, DJ MacPhee, DM Janz, YM Seddon
In Canada, the 2014 Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Pigs proposed the continued operation of existing stall barns after 2024 on condition that bred sows be given access to periodic exercise. Therefore, this study evaluated the effects of periodic exercise on sow welfare. Sows (n = 180) were assigned to one of three treatments: stall-housed (Control: C); stall-housed and exercised weekly for 10 min (Exercise: E); and group-housed (Group: G). Sow postures and stereotypies were recorded once per week in early, mid and late gestation before (AM) and after (PM) exercise. Female piglets (n = 168 from C, E and G sows) underwent isolation and novel object tests at 19–22 days of age. Postures differed by treatment in AM with G sows lying more and sitting less than C and E sows, which did not differ. In PM, E sows sat more than G sows, with C sows being intermediate. In early gestation, G sows performed fewer stereotypies than E sows, with C sows being intermediate. In mid gestation, G sows performed fewer stereotypies than C and E sows, which did not differ. Piglets from C sows were more active in the novel object test than E and G piglets, which did not differ. Group housing improved sow comfort (indicated by postures) and reduced sow stress (indicated by stereotypies), but periodic exercise did not. Decreased activity level in piglets from sows given greater freedom of movement indicates that gestation housing can influence the behaviour of offspring.
{"title":"The effect of providing a greater freedom of movement through periodic exercise on the welfare and stress physiology of stall-housed gestating sows and on piglet behaviour","authors":"M. Tokareva, Jasmine S Brown, DJ MacPhee, DM Janz, YM Seddon","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.002","url":null,"abstract":"In Canada, the 2014 Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Pigs proposed the continued operation of existing stall barns after 2024 on condition that bred sows be given access to periodic exercise. Therefore, this study evaluated the effects of periodic exercise on sow welfare.\u0000 Sows (n = 180) were assigned to one of three treatments: stall-housed (Control: C); stall-housed and exercised weekly for 10 min (Exercise: E); and group-housed (Group: G). Sow postures and stereotypies were recorded once per week in early, mid and late gestation before (AM) and after (PM)\u0000 exercise. Female piglets (n = 168 from C, E and G sows) underwent isolation and novel object tests at 19–22 days of age. Postures differed by treatment in AM with G sows lying more and sitting less than C and E sows, which did not differ. In PM, E sows sat more than G sows, with C sows\u0000 being intermediate. In early gestation, G sows performed fewer stereotypies than E sows, with C sows being intermediate. In mid gestation, G sows performed fewer stereotypies than C and E sows, which did not differ. Piglets from C sows were more active in the novel object test than E and G\u0000 piglets, which did not differ. Group housing improved sow comfort (indicated by postures) and reduced sow stress (indicated by stereotypies), but periodic exercise did not. Decreased activity level in piglets from sows given greater freedom of movement indicates that gestation housing can\u0000 influence the behaviour of offspring.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"102 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86670285","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.3.009
ES Fogarty, G. Cronin, M. Trotter
Parturition is a critical period for the ewe and lamb, and the incidence of dystocia has known impacts on lamb and ewe welfare and productivity. Current methods of dystocia monitoring are mostly conducted through visual observation. Novel approaches for monitoring have also been suggested, including the application of on-animal sensor technologies for remote surveillance of parturition success. This short communication explores how the use of sensor-based parturition detection models can be applied for detection of adverse and successful parturition events, respectively, in pasture-based sheep (Ovis aries). Specifically, the alert profile of a single ewe that experienced vaginal prolapse is reported and compared with the alert profiles of 13 ewes that experienced typical birth events. Although the ewe that experienced vaginal prolapse exhibited some common precursor alerts similar to ewes that progressed through a typical birth event, the overall alert profile was markedly different for the prolapsed animal, with an increased number of alerts occurring from five days prior to the prolapse event. As successful parturition has significant welfare and productivity outcomes, application and validation of these research findings in a commercial system could greatly improve current methods of welfare monitoring at lambing.
{"title":"Exploring the potential for on-animal sensors to detect adverse welfare events: A case study of detecting ewe behaviour prior to vaginal prolapse","authors":"ES Fogarty, G. Cronin, M. Trotter","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.009","url":null,"abstract":"Parturition is a critical period for the ewe and lamb, and the incidence of dystocia has known impacts on lamb and ewe welfare and productivity. Current methods of dystocia monitoring are mostly conducted through visual observation. Novel approaches for monitoring have also been suggested,\u0000 including the application of on-animal sensor technologies for remote surveillance of parturition success. This short communication explores how the use of sensor-based parturition detection models can be applied for detection of adverse and successful parturition events, respectively, in\u0000 pasture-based sheep (Ovis aries). Specifically, the alert profile of a single ewe that experienced vaginal prolapse is reported and compared with the alert profiles of 13 ewes that experienced typical birth events. Although the ewe that experienced vaginal prolapse exhibited some common\u0000 precursor alerts similar to ewes that progressed through a typical birth event, the overall alert profile was markedly different for the prolapsed animal, with an increased number of alerts occurring from five days prior to the prolapse event. As successful parturition has significant welfare\u0000 and productivity outcomes, application and validation of these research findings in a commercial system could greatly improve current methods of welfare monitoring at lambing.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"108 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85668615","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.3.006
L. Engebrecht, T. Smith, M. Suchak
Timely adoption is essential for shelters to prevent unnecessary illness or euthanasia in cats (Felis catus). Many studies have examined the role of individual cat characteristics and environmental factors in facilitating cat adoptions, but none have looked at the role the number of cats being adopted plays. In this study, we examined whether or not adopting cats in pairs influences adoption times, in addition to commonly studied factors. We then collected video data on a small subset of cats to determine whether pairs that were adopted together differed behaviourally from pairs who were not. Our results demonstrate that cats who are adopted as part of a multi-cat outcome spent three days (42%) longer on the adoption floor than those adopted individually, independently of other factors such as age and coat colour. This difference increased to 13 days (185%) longer if the cat had a notification indicating they must be adopted together with another cat. While behavioural data show that these pairs of cats engage in significantly more affiliative behaviour with each other than cats who were adopted singly, there was a large discrepancy between which pairs the shelter classified as multi-outcome and those who would be classified that way based on behaviour alone. We suggest that decisions to place cats together should be made carefully given the potential adverse impacts of keeping cats in the shelter longer. Further, we suggest that guidance should be developed to help shelters accurately and consistently identify which cats merit a multi-outcome adoption.
{"title":"Single vs multiple cat adoptions: A trade-off between longer adoption times and social bonding in shelter cats","authors":"L. Engebrecht, T. Smith, M. Suchak","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.006","url":null,"abstract":"Timely adoption is essential for shelters to prevent unnecessary illness or euthanasia in cats (Felis catus). Many studies have examined the role of individual cat characteristics and environmental factors in facilitating cat adoptions, but none have looked at the role the number\u0000 of cats being adopted plays. In this study, we examined whether or not adopting cats in pairs influences adoption times, in addition to commonly studied factors. We then collected video data on a small subset of cats to determine whether pairs that were adopted together differed behaviourally\u0000 from pairs who were not. Our results demonstrate that cats who are adopted as part of a multi-cat outcome spent three days (42%) longer on the adoption floor than those adopted individually, independently of other factors such as age and coat colour. This difference increased to 13 days (185%)\u0000 longer if the cat had a notification indicating they must be adopted together with another cat. While behavioural data show that these pairs of cats engage in significantly more affiliative behaviour with each other than cats who were adopted singly, there was a large discrepancy between which\u0000 pairs the shelter classified as multi-outcome and those who would be classified that way based on behaviour alone. We suggest that decisions to place cats together should be made carefully given the potential adverse impacts of keeping cats in the shelter longer. Further, we suggest that guidance\u0000 should be developed to help shelters accurately and consistently identify which cats merit a multi-outcome adoption.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88842187","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-31DOI: 10.7120/09627286.31.3.004
IC Travnik, DS Machado, AC Sant'Anna
Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) is used to assess animals' emotional expressions and its potential for serving as an indicator of temperament has been explored. This method is open to assessors' interpretation and it is therefore necessary to evaluate the observers' reliability for different species and contexts. We aimed to assess the intra- and inter-observer reliability of QBA as an indicator of cat (Felis catus) temperament. The QBA was applied by 19 observers with divergent profiles of contact with cats (cat owners vs non-owners) and experience in behavioural assessment (experienced vs inexperienced). Forty-two, 12-min videos were assessed, composed of footage of four behavioural tests: unfamiliar person, novel object, conspecific reaction, and food offering tests. By using Principal Component Analysis, we found three principal components (PC) that were considered the main dimensions of cat temperament. According to Kendall's coefficient of concordance, intra-observer reliability was high to very high in PC1 (0.80–0.90) and moderate to high in PC2 and PC3 (0.50–0.82). Inter-observer reliability for the 19 observers was high in PC1 (0.71) and low in PC2 and PC3 (0.21–0.29). The individual concordances with the gold observer (defined based on greater experience with the QBA) ranged from moderate to high. We concluded that QBA could be a reliable tool to assess cat temperament, given the high values of intra- and inter-observer reliabilities in PC1, which is the dimension that most explains the behavioural variations in the cats' temperament. The same did not occur for PC2 and PC3, showing that reliability varied among the different dimensions and observers.
{"title":"Do you see the same cat that I see? Inter- and intra-observer reliability for Qualitative Behaviour Assessment as temperament indicator in domestic cats","authors":"IC Travnik, DS Machado, AC Sant'Anna","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.004","url":null,"abstract":"Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) is used to assess animals' emotional expressions and its potential for serving as an indicator of temperament has been explored. This method is open to assessors' interpretation and it is therefore necessary to evaluate the observers' reliability\u0000 for different species and contexts. We aimed to assess the intra- and inter-observer reliability of QBA as an indicator of cat (Felis catus) temperament. The QBA was applied by 19 observers with divergent profiles of contact with cats (cat owners vs non-owners) and experience in behavioural\u0000 assessment (experienced vs inexperienced). Forty-two, 12-min videos were assessed, composed of footage of four behavioural tests: unfamiliar person, novel object, conspecific reaction, and food offering tests. By using Principal Component Analysis, we found three principal components (PC)\u0000 that were considered the main dimensions of cat temperament. According to Kendall's coefficient of concordance, intra-observer reliability was high to very high in PC1 (0.80–0.90) and moderate to high in PC2 and PC3 (0.50–0.82). Inter-observer reliability for the 19 observers was\u0000 high in PC1 (0.71) and low in PC2 and PC3 (0.21–0.29). The individual concordances with the gold observer (defined based on greater experience with the QBA) ranged from moderate to high. We concluded that QBA could be a reliable tool to assess cat temperament, given the high values of\u0000 intra- and inter-observer reliabilities in PC1, which is the dimension that most explains the behavioural variations in the cats' temperament. The same did not occur for PC2 and PC3, showing that reliability varied among the different dimensions and observers.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74620014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：