Investigation of a Standardized Qualitative Behaviour Assessment and Exploration of Potential Influencing Factors on the Emotional State of Dairy Calves

Finding biomarkers of experience in animals

At a time when there is a growing public interest in animal welfare, it is critical to have objective means to assess the way that an animal experiences a situation. Objectivity is critical to ensure appropriate animal welfare outcomes. Existing behavioural, physiological, and neurobiological indicators that are used to assess animal welfare can verify the absence of extremely negative outcomes. But welfare is more than an absence of negative outcomes and an appropriate indicator should reflect the full spectrum of experience of an animal, from negative to positive. In this review, we draw from the knowledge of human biomedical science to propose a list of candidate biological markers (biomarkers) that should reflect the experiential state of non-human animals. The proposed biomarkers can be classified on their main function as endocrine, oxidative stress, non-coding molecular, and thermobiological markers. We also discuss practical challenges that must be addressed before any of these biomarkers can become useful to assess the experience of an animal in real-life.

The Power Is in the Word-Do Laypeople Interpret Descriptors of Dog Emotional States Correctly?

A basic understanding of dog behaviour and emotion is relevant not only for professionals, such as veterinary personnel or dog trainers, but also for dog owners and for people with little contact with dogs. Information about dog behaviour and emotions is mostly conveyed verbally. This study explores whether definitions of dog behaviour and emotion are understood in such a way that they can be allocated to a descriptor (i.e., a label such as "fearful"), even by people with low background knowledge. If people can match descriptors to definitions, this suggests that the definitions are distinct enough and elicit mental representations of behaviour that can fit the label. Good agreement on the definitions is a prerequisite for the validity of the descriptors used; however, no study to date has tested this. A sample of 236 adults was asked to match descriptors of Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) for veterinary and shelter situations to their correct definitions, e.g., the descriptor "fearful" to its definition "dog may try to flee, hide or freeze; ears back". Matching was substantially above chance; nonetheless, the mean proportion of correct responses was only 50% (SD ± 16.6%) for the veterinary QBA set and 33% (SD ± 14.3%) for the shelter QBA set. Performance in the matching task was positively correlated with measures of experience with dogs. Taken together, the results suggest that descriptor-definition pairs used to describe dog behaviour need to be clearly defined to avoid misinterpretations when teaching laypeople how to interpret canine behaviour.

Application of QBA to Assess the Emotional State of Horses during the Loading Phase of Transport

To identify feasible indicators to evaluate animals' emotional states as a parameter to assess animal welfare, the present study aimed at investigating the accuracy of free choice profiling (FCP) and fixed list (FL) approach of Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) in horses during the loading phase of transport. A total of 13 stakeholders were trained to score 2 different sets of videos of mixed breed horses loaded for road transport, using both FCP and FL, in 2 sessions. Generalized Procustes Analysis (GPA) consensus profile explained a higher percentage of variation (80.8%) than the mean of 1000 randomized profiles (41.2 ± 1.6%; p = 0.001) for the FCP method, showing an excellent inter-observer agreement. GPA identified two main factors, explaining 65.1% and 3.7% of the total variation. Factor 1 ranging from 'anxious/ to 'calm/relaxed', described the valence of the horses' emotional states. Factor 2, ranging from 'bright' to 'assessing/withdrawn', described the arousal. As for FL, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) first and second components (PC1 and PC2, respectively), explaining on average 59.8% and 12.6% of the data variability, had significant agreement between observers. PC1 ranges from relaxed/confident to anxious/frightened, while PC2 from alert/inquisitive to calm. Our study highlighted the need for the use of descriptors specifically selected, throughout a prior FCP process for the situation we want to evaluate to get a good QBA accuracy level.

V-QBA vs. QBA—How Do Video and Live Analysis Compare for Qualitative Behaviour Assessment?

Animal welfare is an inextricable part of livestock production and sustainability. Assessing welfare, beyond physical indicators of health, is challenging and often relies on qualitative techniques. Behaviour is a key component of welfare to consider and Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) aims to achieve this by systematically scoring behaviour across specific terms. In recent years, numerous studies have conducted QBA by using video footage, however, the method was not originally developed using video and video QBA (V-QBA) requires validation. Forty live QBAs were conducted, by two assessors, on housed beef cattle to help fill this validation gap. Video was recorded over the assessment period and a second video assessment was conducted. Live and video scores for each term were compared for both correlation and significant difference. Principle component analysis (PCA) was then conducted and correlations and differences between QBA and V-QBA for the first two components were calculated. Of the 20 terms, three were removed due to an overwhelming majority of scores of zero. Of the remaining 17 terms, 12 correlated significantly, and a significant pairwise difference was found for one (“Bored”). QBA and V-QBA results correlated across both PC1 (defined as “arousal”) and PC2 (defined as “mood”). Whilst there was no significant difference between the techniques for PC1, there was for PC2, with V-QBA generally yielding lower scores than QBA. Furthermore, based on PC1 and PC2, corresponding QBA and V-QBA scores were significantly closer than would be expected at random. Results found broad agreement between QBA and V-QBA at both univariate and multivariate levels. However, the lack of absolute agreement and muted V-QBA results for PC2 mean that caution should be taken when implementing V-QBA and that it should ideally be treated independently from live QBA until further evidence is published. Future research should focus on a greater variety of animals, environments, and assessors to address further validation of the method.

Associations between Dairy Herds' Qualitative Behavior and Aspects of Herd Health, Stockperson and Farm Factors-A Cross-Sectional Exploration

The affective state is an integrated aspect of farm animal welfare, which is understood as the animals' perception of their living environment and of their internal biological functioning. The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore animal-internal and external factors potentially influencing dairy cows' affective state. For this purpose, qualitative behavior assessments (QBA) describing the animals' body language were applied at herd level on 25 dairy farms. By means of principal component analysis (PCA), scores of PC1 (QBAscores) were determined for further analyses. From monthly milk recordings (MR) one year retrospectively, prevalences of udder and metabolic health impairments were calculated. Factors of housing, management, and human-animal contact were recorded via interviews and observations. A multivariable regression was calculated following a univariable preselection of factors. No associations were found between MR indicators and QBAscores. However, more positive QBAscores were associated with bedded cubicles or straw yards compared to raised cubicles, increased voluntary stockperson contact with the cows, and fixation of cows during main feeding times, the latter contributing to the explanatory model, but not being significant. These results underline the importance of lying comfort, positive human-animal relationship and reduction of competition during feeding for the well-being of dairy cows.

Are Dual-Purpose Chickens Twice as Good? Measuring Performance and Animal Welfare throughout the Fattening Period

Chickens are the world's most widely used farm animal and have a significant genetic diversity. In the current study, we investigated three strains for their suitability as dual-purpose chickens, with a focus on the fattening ability and welfare of the cockerels: 1. layer cockerels (Lohmann Brown, LB, n = 714); 2. cockerels of a dual-purpose hybrid (Lohmann Dual, LD, n = 844); and 3. cockerels of a native breed (Rhinelander, RL, n = 458). Chicks were raised under identical conditions and marked individually to compare focus and random sampling methods for weighing birds weekly. Because chicks of dual-purpose origins are usually raised mixed-sex, cockerels and pullets were weighed and observed together until sexes the were identifiable at week 10 of their life. During the 10th to 20th week of life, investigations were continued on 100 cockerels per genotype. Key figures for growth performance, such as feed conversion ratio (FCR) and European production efficiency factor (EPEF), were also calculated at weekly intervals. LD cockerels showed considerable growth performance (p < 0.001 compared to LB, RL, 2 kg at 9 weeks), whereas LB reached a live weight of 2 kg at 13 weeks and RL at 15 weeks of age. Genotype-dependent differences were also evident, with favorable FCR and EPEF for LD, intermediate for LB, and unfavorable for RL (all p < 0.001). The results of the FCR and EPEF suggest that cockerels should be slaughtered around week 8 of life, although only the carcass of the LD might be marketable. Thus, the optimal time of slaughter based on production parameters such as FCR and EPEF is different from the time when the animal reaches a marketable 2 kg live weight. Animal-based welfare indicators revealed that the RL are not adapted to production environments, including those that are extensive. Further research aimed at adapted feed management, including better FCR, and animals adapted to the respective production environments is necessary to improve alternative poultry production in the future.

Developing an Animal Welfare Assessment Protocol for Livestock Transported by Sea

Australian livestock industries face increased scrutiny from animal welfare groups and society, and the long-distance transport of livestock by sea has recently gained particular attention. Other than non-compliance with broad regulatory standards and voyage mortality rates, there is minimal information to ascertain the welfare of exported livestock. There is currently no standardised, validated animal welfare assessment protocol for livestock on-farm prior to live export or when undergoing transport. This study describes a novel assessment protocol suitable for use on live feeder and slaughter animals exported by sea from Australia. Health and welfare indicators for use in the livestock export supply chain were identified by reviewing three internationally recognised animal welfare assessment protocols for livestock; Welfare Quality®, AWIN and AssureWel, as well as consulting with industry compliance standards and guidelines. This paper proposes a welfare protocol designed to assess sheep and beef cattle exported by sea from Australia, and incorporates environmental-, resource-, management- and animal-based measures. In collaboration with industry, this welfare protocol can be tested on commercial livestock consignments, and be used for ongoing management, for increased transparency and to provide feedback to operators for continuous improvement.