Training fish for restocking: refuge and predator training in the hatchery has limited benefits for a marine fish

Environmental enrichment improves behaviors rather than the growth and physiology of rock bream Oplegnathus fasciatus

Environmental enrichment has the potential to improve the welfare and post-release survival of hatchery fish stocked for conservation purposes. However, the effectiveness of environmental enrichment is partly dependent on the fish species, life stage, and specific enrichment structure used. To enhance the effectiveness of environmental enrichment, it is crucial to focus on characteristic differences in enrichment structures, such as type and level. This study investigated how differences in enrichment type and level affected physiological and behavioral aspects of the welfare of pre-release juvenile rock bream Oplegnathus fasciatus by evaluating growth performance, basal and stressed cortisol levels, antioxidant enzyme activities, and exploratory behaviors regarding anxiety and flexibility. Fish were reared for 4 weeks in different enrichment treatments: barren, low-level cover structure, high-level cover structure, low-level interference structure (LI), and high-level interference structure (HI). The results revealed that fish reared with the LI treatment showed less anxiety and greater flexibility with respect to exploratory behaviors, without oxidative damage being detected. Despite exhibiting less anxiety as well, fish reared in the HI treatment had oxidative damage, indicated by lower superoxide dismutase activity, compared to those in the barren treatment. In addition, none of these enrichment structures enhanced growth performance or mitigate chronic and acute stress responses. Overall, the low-level interference structure may be more favorable in promoting the behavioral welfare of the fish. Application of this type and level of enrichment may increase the survival of the hatchery fish after release, which is critical to stocking success.

The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review

Many wild animals perform hiding behaviours for a variety of reasons, such as evading predators or other conspecifics. Unlike their wild counterparts, farmed animals often live in relatively barren environments without the opportunity to hide. Researchers have begun to study the impact of access to hiding spaces ("hides") in farmed animals, including possible effects on animal welfare. The aims of this scoping review were to: 1) identify the farmed species that have been most used in research investigating the provision of hides, 2) describe the context in which hides have been provided to farmed animals, and 3) describe the impact (positive, negative or neutral/inconclusive) that hides have on animals, including indicators of animal welfare. Three online databases (CAB Abstracts, Web of Science, and PubMed) were used to search for a target population of farmed animals with access to hiding spaces. From this search, 4,631 citations were screened and 151 were included in the review. Fourteen animal types were represented, most commonly chickens (48% of papers), cattle (9%), foxes (8%), and fish (7%). Relatively few papers were found on other species including deer, quail, ducks, lobsters, turkeys, and goats. Hides were used in four contexts: at parturition or oviposition (56%), for general enrichment (43%), for neonatal animals (4%), or for sick or injured animals (1%). A total of 218 outcomes relevant to our objectives were found including 7 categories: hide use, motivation, and/or preference (47% of outcomes), behavioural indicators of affective state (17%), health, injuries, and/or production (16%), agonistic behaviour (8%), abnormal repetitive behaviours (6%), physiological indicators of stress (5%), and affiliative behaviours (1%). Hiding places resulted in 162 positive (74%), 14 negative (6%), and 42 neutral/inconclusive (19%) outcomes. Hides had a generally positive impact on the animals included in this review; more research is encouraged for under-represented species.

Physical enrichment research for captive fish: Time to focus on the DETAILS

Growing research effort has shown that physical enrichment (PE) can improve fish welfare and research validity. However, the inclusion of PE does not always result in positive effects and conflicting findings have highlighted the many nuances involved. Effects are known to depend on species and life stage tested, but effects may also vary with differences in the specific items used as enrichment between and within studies. Reporting fine-scale characteristics of items used as enrichment in studies may help to reveal these factors. We conducted a survey of PE-focused studies published in the last 5 years to examine the current state of methodological reporting. The survey results suggest that some aspects of enrichment are not adequately detailed. For example, the amount and dimensions of objects used as enrichment were frequently omitted. Similarly, the ecological relevance, or other justification, for enrichment items was frequently not made explicit. Focusing on ecologically relevant aspects of PE and increasing the level of detail reported in studies may benefit future work and we propose a framework with the acronym DETAILS (Dimensions, Ecological rationale, Timing of enrichment, Amount, Inputs, Lighting and Social environment). We outline the potential importance of each of the elements of this framework with the hope it may aid in the level of reporting and standardization across studies, ultimately aiding the search for more beneficial types of PE and the development of our understanding and ability to improve the welfare of captive fish and promote more biologically relevant behaviour.