Cargando…

Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep

Sheep are managed under a variety of different environments (continually outdoors, partially outdoors with seasonal or diurnal variation, continuously indoors) and for different purposes, which makes assessing welfare challenging. This diversity means that resource-based indicators are not particula...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richmond, Susan E., Wemelsfelder, Francoise, de Heredia, Ina Beltran, Ruiz, Roberto, Canali, Elisabetta, Dwyer, Cathy M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5732139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29322048
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00210
_version_ 1783286624161890304
author Richmond, Susan E.
Wemelsfelder, Francoise
de Heredia, Ina Beltran
Ruiz, Roberto
Canali, Elisabetta
Dwyer, Cathy M.
author_facet Richmond, Susan E.
Wemelsfelder, Francoise
de Heredia, Ina Beltran
Ruiz, Roberto
Canali, Elisabetta
Dwyer, Cathy M.
author_sort Richmond, Susan E.
collection PubMed
description Sheep are managed under a variety of different environments (continually outdoors, partially outdoors with seasonal or diurnal variation, continuously indoors) and for different purposes, which makes assessing welfare challenging. This diversity means that resource-based indicators are not particularly useful and, thus, a welfare assessment scheme for sheep, focusing on animal-based indicators, was developed. We focus specifically on ewes, as the most numerous group of sheep present on farm, although many of the indicators may also have relevance to adult male sheep. Using the Welfare Quality(®) framework of four Principles and 12 Criteria, we considered the validity, reliability, and feasibility of 46 putative animal-based indicators derived from the literature for these criteria. Where animal-based indicators were potentially unreliably or were not considered feasible, we also considered the resource-based indicators of access to water, stocking density, and floor slipperiness. With the exception of the criteria “Absence of prolonged thirst,” we suggest at least one animal-based indicator for each welfare criterion. As a minimum, face validity was available for all indicators; however, for many, we found evidence of convergent validity and discriminant validity (e.g., lameness as measured by gait score, body condition score). The reliability of most of the physical and health measures has been tested in the field and found to be appropriate for use in welfare assessment. However, for the majority of the proposed behavioral indicators (lying synchrony, social withdrawal, postures associated with pain, vocalizations, stereotypy, vigilance, response to surprise, and human approach test), this still needs to be tested. In conclusion, the comprehensive assessment of sheep welfare through largely animal-based measures is supported by the literature through the use of indicators focusing on specific aspects of sheep biology. Further work is required for some indicators to ensure that measures are reliable when used in commercial settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5732139
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57321392018-01-10 Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep Richmond, Susan E. Wemelsfelder, Francoise de Heredia, Ina Beltran Ruiz, Roberto Canali, Elisabetta Dwyer, Cathy M. Front Vet Sci Veterinary Science Sheep are managed under a variety of different environments (continually outdoors, partially outdoors with seasonal or diurnal variation, continuously indoors) and for different purposes, which makes assessing welfare challenging. This diversity means that resource-based indicators are not particularly useful and, thus, a welfare assessment scheme for sheep, focusing on animal-based indicators, was developed. We focus specifically on ewes, as the most numerous group of sheep present on farm, although many of the indicators may also have relevance to adult male sheep. Using the Welfare Quality(®) framework of four Principles and 12 Criteria, we considered the validity, reliability, and feasibility of 46 putative animal-based indicators derived from the literature for these criteria. Where animal-based indicators were potentially unreliably or were not considered feasible, we also considered the resource-based indicators of access to water, stocking density, and floor slipperiness. With the exception of the criteria “Absence of prolonged thirst,” we suggest at least one animal-based indicator for each welfare criterion. As a minimum, face validity was available for all indicators; however, for many, we found evidence of convergent validity and discriminant validity (e.g., lameness as measured by gait score, body condition score). The reliability of most of the physical and health measures has been tested in the field and found to be appropriate for use in welfare assessment. However, for the majority of the proposed behavioral indicators (lying synchrony, social withdrawal, postures associated with pain, vocalizations, stereotypy, vigilance, response to surprise, and human approach test), this still needs to be tested. In conclusion, the comprehensive assessment of sheep welfare through largely animal-based measures is supported by the literature through the use of indicators focusing on specific aspects of sheep biology. Further work is required for some indicators to ensure that measures are reliable when used in commercial settings. Frontiers Media S.A. 2017-12-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5732139/ /pubmed/29322048 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00210 Text en Copyright © 2017 Richmond, Wemelsfelder, de Heredia, Ruiz, Canali and Dwyer. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Veterinary Science
Richmond, Susan E.
Wemelsfelder, Francoise
de Heredia, Ina Beltran
Ruiz, Roberto
Canali, Elisabetta
Dwyer, Cathy M.
Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep
title Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep
title_full Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep
title_fullStr Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep
title_short Evaluation of Animal-Based Indicators to Be Used in a Welfare Assessment Protocol for Sheep
title_sort evaluation of animal-based indicators to be used in a welfare assessment protocol for sheep
topic Veterinary Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5732139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29322048
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2017.00210
work_keys_str_mv AT richmondsusane evaluationofanimalbasedindicatorstobeusedinawelfareassessmentprotocolforsheep
AT wemelsfelderfrancoise evaluationofanimalbasedindicatorstobeusedinawelfareassessmentprotocolforsheep
AT deherediainabeltran evaluationofanimalbasedindicatorstobeusedinawelfareassessmentprotocolforsheep
AT ruizroberto evaluationofanimalbasedindicatorstobeusedinawelfareassessmentprotocolforsheep
AT canalielisabetta evaluationofanimalbasedindicatorstobeusedinawelfareassessmentprotocolforsheep
AT dwyercathym evaluationofanimalbasedindicatorstobeusedinawelfareassessmentprotocolforsheep