Capturing wild animal welfare: a physiological perspective

Affective states, such as emotions, are presumably widespread across the animal kingdom because of the adaptive advantages they are supposed to confer. However, the study of the affective states of animals has thus far been largely restricted to enhancing the welfare of animals managed by humans in non-natural contexts. Given the diversity of wild animals and the variable conditions they can experience, extending studies on animal affective states to the natural conditions that most animals experience will allow us to broaden and deepen our general understanding of animal welfare. Yet, this same diversity makes examining animal welfare in the wild highly challenging. There is therefore a need for unifying theoretical frameworks and methodological approaches that can guide researchers keen to engage in this promising research area. The aim of this article is to help advance this important research area by highlighting the central relationship between physiology and animal welfare and rectify its apparent oversight, as revealed by the current scientific literature on wild animals. Moreover, this article emphasises the advantages of including physiological markers to assess animal welfare in the wild (e.g. objectivity, comparability, condition range, temporality), as well as their concomitant limitations (e.g. only access to peripheral physiological markers with complex relationships with affective states). Best-practice recommendations (e.g. replication and multifactorial approaches) are also provided to allow physiological markers to be used most effectively and appropriately when assessing the welfare of animals in their natural habitat. This review seeks to provide the foundation for a new and distinct research area with a vast theoretical and applied potential: wild animal welfare physiology.

Bisphenols impact hormone levels in animals: A meta-analysis

Bisphenols are used in the manufacture of plastics and are endocrine disrupting compounds detectable in free living organisms and environments globally. The original bisphenol, bisphenol A (BPA), is best known as a xenoestrogen, but it also disrupts other steroid hormones and other classes of hormones including thyroid and pituitary hormones. When its toxicity became better known, BPA was replaced by presumably less toxic alternatives, including bisphenols S, F, and AF. However, recent data suggest that all bisphenols can have endocrine disrupting effects, although their impacts remain unresolved particularly in non-human animals. Our aim was to establish the current state-of-knowledge of the effects of different bisphenols on circulating hormone levels in non-human animals. Our meta-analysis showed that a diverse range of hormones (including thyroid hormones, corticosterone, follicle stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone, and estradiol) are strongly impacted by exposure to any bisphenol type, and that in laboratory rats (Rattus norvegicus) the effect was modified by life-stage. Although there were qualitative differences, BPA alternatives had as great or greater effects on hormone levels as BPA. However, data coverage across hormones was uneven, and most studies measured the effects of BPA on vertebrate reproductive hormones. Similarly, taxonomic coverage was poor. Over 80% of data originated from laboratory rats and zebrafish (Danio rerio) and there are no data for whole classes of invertebrates and vertebrates (e.g., amphibians). Our results show that all bisphenols alter circulating levels of a broad range of hormones. However, the current state-of-knowledge is incomplete so that the ecological impacts of bisphenols are difficult to gauge, although based on the available data bisphenols are likely to be detrimental to a broad range of taxa and ecosystems.