Judgement bias testing in group-housed gestating sows

Cognitive tasks as measures of pig welfare: a systematic review

Cognitive approaches are increasingly used to assess animal welfare, but no systematic review has been conducted on pigs despite their cognitive capacities. Our aims were two-fold: first, to assess the popularity and heterogeneity of this approach by quantifying the different cognitive tasks used and welfare interventions studied. The second was to assess how often results from cognitive tasks supported treatment effects. The search yielded 36 studies that met our criteria. Eleven different cognitive tasks were applied (three most common: judgment bias, learned approach/aversion, and holeboard). Welfare interventions investigated were also diverse: the impact of 19 other different events/conditions/states were reported (most common: housing enrichment). We defined "supportive" as the observation of a significant difference between treatment groups consistent with an author's expectation or hypothesis. Supportive findings were reported in 44% of papers. Interventions yielded no significant difference in 33% of studies. In another 21% of reports, outcomes were mixed and a single study refuted the author's predictions. When considering specific cognitive tasks, authors' predictions of welfare differences were supported most often when using learned approach/aversion (55% of these studies). Similar supportive results were observed less commonly (40% each) when using judgment bias and holeboard tests. Analysis of additional concomitant measures of welfare (health, physiology or behavior) revealed that behavioral measures were most frequently supportive of author's expectations (41%) as well as often matching the actual outcomes of these cognitive tasks (47%). This systematic review highlights the growing popularity of cognitive tasks as measures of pig welfare. However, overall rates of supportive results, i.e., changes in performance on cognitive tasks due to welfare interventions, have been limited so far, even for the most employed task, judgment bias. The numerous different combinations of experimental paradigms and welfare interventions reported in the literature creates challenges for a critical meta-analysis of the field especially in evaluating the efficiency of specific cognitive tasks in assessing animal welfare. This work also highlights important knowledge gaps in the use of cognitive tasks that will require both further validation as well as novel innovation to ensure that their potential is fully realized in the measurement of pig welfare.

New Perspectives In The Objective Evaluation Of Animal Welfare, With Focus On The Domestic Pig

Animal welfare can be viewed as the result of integrating repeated affective evaluations of success in coping with environmental challenges, i.e., subjective challenge adequacy.  The present work summarizes why established physiological and behavioral welfare parameters are inadequate to assess challenge adequacy. Behavioral tests based on the mood-congruent judgment effect and physiologic parameters based on components of the somatotropic axis are proposed as an alternative. Here, the judgment bias measures an animal's subjective confidence to cope successfully with a challenge, which is in turn modulated by the animal's previous experience. The somatotropic axis incorporates the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) and its binding proteins (IGFBP), which are involved in the regulation of metabolism and growth. First results indicate that in particular IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 react with higher latency and higher inertness to short-term stressful events than established physiological stress parameters. Before these indicators can be utilized for overall welfare assessment, further validation studies are necessary that provide more insights into how repeatable the measurements are under different conditions and which other factors may confound the measures.

A systematic review of the impact of housing on sow welfare during post-weaning and early pregnancy periods

Breeder animals are an important focus in farm animal welfare assessments as they typically live the longest lives and are at the greatest risk for suffering due to their longevity. For breeding pigs, the time between the end of lactation (post-weaning) and the implantation of embryos (early gestation) is very dynamic from both a physiological and husbandry perspective. However, research to date is limited on how best to house and manage sows during this critical period of their production cycle from a welfare perspective. Previous animal-based welfare outcome measures were restricted to certain health, behavioral and physiological indicators. This systematic review used Web of Science to make in-depth comparisons among welfare-based studies that focus on sow housing during the post-weaning and early pregnancy period to identify important knowledge gaps. Only a small number of studies (n = 27) were found that met our systematic search criteria. Compared to stalls, group housing requires mixing of animals and always triggers more aggression and skin lesions at the time of mixing. The predominant use of health and physiological indicators constrained the animal-based welfare outcomes in these studies. Thus, what type of housing yields the best overall welfare outcome remains to be elucidated as none of the studies found explored the mental wellbeing of sows during this period. This systematic review defines a critical knowledge gap regarding the full impact of housing on the welfare of post-weaning and early gestation sows. This gap, and thus the true welfare impact of sow housing, will only be addressed by the use of novel, more holistic assessment methods that also capture the psychological state of the sow.

Judgment Bias During Gestation in Domestic Pigs

In humans and rats, changes in affect are known to occur during pregnancy, however it is unknown how gestation may influence mood in other non-human mammals. This study assessed changes in pigs' judgment bias as a measure of affective state throughout gestation. Pigs were trained to complete a spatial judgment bias task with reference to positive and negative locations. We tested gilts before mating, and during early and late gestation, by assessing their responses to ambiguous probe locations. Pigs responded increasingly negatively to ambiguous probes as gestation progressed and there were consistent inter-individual differences in baseline optimism. This suggests that the pigs' affective state may be altered during gestation, although as a non-pregnant control group was not tested, an effect of learning cannot be ruled out. These results suggest that judgment bias is altered during gestation in domestic pigs, consequently raising novel welfare considerations for captive multiparous species.

Judgement bias of group housed gestating sows predicted by behavioral traits, but not physical measures of welfare

Judgement bias testing has emerged as a potential tool for assessing affective states in animals. Researchers infer an animal's affective state based on an animal's response to an ambiguous stimulus that is intermediate to both the rewarded and punished conditioned stimuli. Animals can be classified as "optimistic" or having a positive affective state if the animal displays behaviors that suggest an increased expectation of reward in the face of ambiguous stimuli. Alternatively, animals can be classified "pessimistic" or having a negative affective state if the animal displays behaviors that suggest an increased expectation of punishment in the face of ambiguous stimuli. Recent reports in multiple species question what factors influence performance in judgement bias testing, and which may allow for erroneous conclusions regarding individual affective state. In order to better understand this concern, 25 female swine were subjected to behavioral assessments at critical rearing stages to determine response variability. These same individuals were then assessed for physical measures of welfare and judgement bias using the "go/no-go" task as breeding adults. Sows which were more aggressive approached the ambiguous, but not the positive, stimulus significantly faster than others. Both optimistic and pessimistic biases were observed despite all sows living in enriched housing, and, sows with more positive physical welfare measures (fewer skin lesions and healthy body condition) did not exhibit more optimistic judgement biases. Our data demonstrate that behavior traits, such as aggressiveness, can affect a sow's performance in a judgement bias test, while measures of physical health did not. We suggest that individual differences in behavior (e.g., bold-aggressive behavioral syndrome, or, proactive coping style) generate different emotional responses and can contribute to the animal's overall affective state more so than physical ailment. Our findings highlight the complexity of how different factors impact an animal's overall affective state and support the need for complementary measures in future JBT studies, including personality assessment.

Negative expectations and vulnerability to stressors in animals

Humans express stable differences in pessimism that render some individuals more vulnerable to stressors and mood disorders. We explored whether non-human animals express stable individual differences in expectations (assessed via judgment bias tests) and whether these differences relate to susceptibility to stressors. Judgment bias tests do not distinguish pessimism from sensitivity to reinforcers; negative expectations are likely driven by a combination of these two elements. The available evidence suggests that animals express stable individual differences in expectations such that some persistently perceive ambiguous situations in a more negative way. A lack of research prevents drawing firm conclusions on how negative expectations affect responses to stressors, but current evidence suggests a link between negative expectations and the adoption of avoidance coping strategies, stronger responses to uncontrollable stressors and risk of mood-related disorders. We explore implications for animals living in captivity and for research using animals as models for human disorders.

Evaluation of miRNA as Biomarkers of Emotional Valence in Pigs

Simple Summary

It is widely recognized that the assessment of animal welfare should include measures of positive emotional (affective) state. Existing behavioral and physiological indicators of a positive affective state frequently lack sensitivity, objectivity or are unsuitable in a production environment. Therefore, there is a need to develop new approaches to accurately and objectively measure a positive emotional state in animals, including novel molecular markers such a miRNA. These biomarkers must be measurable in the peripheral circulation and provide an accurate account of the physiological and molecular activity in regions of the brain associated with emotional processing. Further, such markers require validation against established behavioral and physiological indices. Here we investigated the efficacy of circulating miRNA as biomarkers of emotional state in the pig.

Abstract

The ability to assess the welfare of animals is dependent on our ability to accurately determine their emotional (affective) state, with particular emphasis being placed on the identification of positive emotions. The challenge remains that current physiological and behavioral indices are either unable to distinguish between positive and negative emotional states, or they are simply not suitable for a production environment. Therefore, the development of novel measures of animal emotion is a necessity. Here we investigated the efficacy of microRNA (miRNA) in the brain and blood as biomarkers of emotional state in the pig. Female Large White × Landrace pigs (n = 24) were selected at weaning and trained to perform a judgment bias test (JBT), before being exposed for 5 weeks to either enriched (n = 12) or barren housing (n = 12) conditions. Pigs were tested on the JBT once prior to treatment, and immediately following treatment. MiRNA and neurotransmitters were analyzed in blood and brain tissue after euthanasia. Treatment had no effect on the outcomes of the JBT. There was also no effect of treatment on miRNA expression in blood or the brain (FDR p > 0.05). However, pigs exposed to enriched housing had elevated dopamine within the striatum compared to pigs in barren housing (p = 0.02). The results imply that either (a) miRNAs are not likely to be valid biomarkers of a positive affective state, at least under the type of conditions employed in this study, or (b) that the study design used to modify affective state was not able to create differential affective states, and therefore establish the validity of miRNA as biomarkers.

Social status and previous experience in the group as predictors of welfare of sows housed in large semi-static groups

Mixing gestating sows implies hierarchy formation and has detrimental consequences on welfare. The effects of social stress on the most vulnerable individuals may be underestimated and it is therefore important to evaluate welfare between individuals within groups. This study aimed at investigating the impact of social status and previous experience in the group on well-being of sows housed in large semi-static groups. We assessed aggression (d0 (mixing), d2, d27, d29), body lesions (d1, d26, d84) and feeding order on 20 groups of 46–91 animals. Social status was based on the proportion of fights won during a 6-hr observation period between d0 and d2. Dominants (29%) were those who won more fights than they lost, Subdominants (25%) won fewer fights than they lost, Losers (23%) never won any fight in which they were involved while Avoiders (23%) were never involved in fights. Resident sows (70%) were already present in the group in the previous gestation while New sows (30%) were newly introduced at mixing. Subdominants and Dominants were highly involved in fights around mixing but this was more detrimental for Subdominants than Dominants, Losers and Avoiders since they had the highest body lesion scores at mixing. Avoiders received less non-reciprocal agonistic acts than Losers on d2 (P = 0.0001) and had the lowest body lesion scores after mixing. However, Avoiders and Losers were more at risk in the long-term since they had the highest body lesions scores at d26 and d84. They were followed by Subdominants and then Dominants. New sows fought more (P<0.0001), tended to be involved in longer fights (P = 0.075) around mixing and had more body lesions throughout gestation than Resident sows. Feeding order from one-month post-mixing was influenced both by the previous experience in the group and social status (P<0.0001). New sows, especially with a low social status, are more vulnerable throughout gestation and could serve as indicators of non-optimal conditions.

Like Mother Like Child: Do Fearful Sows Have Fearful Piglets?

Gestational and early life experiences affect subsequent behavioural and physical development. The objective of the current study was to investigate associations between gilts' fear of humans, gestational stress level, and feeding and maternal behaviour, as well as how these related to aspects of the personality and growth of their offspring. A total of 37 gilts were used. Four human approach tests were performed between d 104 and d 111 of gestation to classify gilts as fearful or friendly. Gilt feeding behaviour and salivary cortisol concentration was measured between d 90 and d 108 of gestation, and gilt nursing behaviour assessed at d 13 of lactation. Piglets were subject to a back test at d 13 of age, to an open field test and a human approach test at d 20 of age, and growth was monitored to weaning (d 26 of age). Gilts classified as having a fearful behavioural profile had higher cortisol levels than friendly gilts (p < 0.05). Human fear level did not affect reproductive performance or the growth of offspring (p > 0.05). The offspring of friendly gilts tended to have a more active response to the back test (p = 0.09), less freezing response in the open field test (p < 0.05), and received human contact more than piglets from fearful gilts (p < 0.05). The present study shows that gilt human fear level is linked to their stress levels, which can affect the personality of their piglets.

Emotion in animal contests

Emotions encompass cognitive and behavioural responses to reward and punishment. Using contests as a case-study, we propose that short-term emotions underpin animals' assessments, decision-making and behaviour. Equating contest assessments to emotional 'appraisals', we describe how contestants appraise more than resource value and outcome probability. These appraisals elicit the cognition, drive and neurophysiology that governs aggressive behaviour. We discuss how recent contest outcomes induce long-term moods, which impact subsequent contest behaviour. Finally, we distinguish between integral (objectively relevant) and incidental (objectively irrelevant) emotions and moods (affective states). Unlike existing ecological models, our approach predicts that incidental events influence contest dynamics, and that contests become incidental influences themselves, potentially causing maladaptive decision-making. As affective states cross contexts, a more holistic ethology (incorporating emotions and moods) would illuminate animal cognition and behaviour.

Social proximity in dairy calves is affected by differences in pessimism

Negative social interactions have been extensively studied in dairy cattle, but little is known about the establishment of positive (preferential) relationships. Adult dairy cows are known to spend more time at close proximity to specific social partners, indicating that they establish stronger bonds with these animals, but few studies have explored what happens in socially housed calves. In this study, we explored whether calves that spent their entire life in the same social group established social preferences (i.e. pairs of individuals that interact more) that are stable over time (two 48-h periods, separated by three days), across two types of behavior (standing and lying) and across contexts (change in environment and housing design). When housed in an open pack, calves showed consistent proximity patterns when standing (but not when lying). These preferential relationships persisted even after calves were moved into a new pen fitted with free stalls. At the individual level, calves varied in how selective they were in their social relationships, with some calves spending much more time with specific partners than did others. This degree of selectivity was not associated to Sociability, marginally associated to Fearfulness, but was associated with Pessimism (more pessimistic calves were more selective in their social relationships). In conclusion, calves can form selective relationships that appeared to be consistent over time and across context, and the degree to which calves were selective varied in relation to individual differences in Pessimism.