Cargando…

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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Spitzer, Hannah B., Meagher, Rebecca K., Proudfoot, Kathryn L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9704605/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36441732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277665
_version_ 1784840087926734848
author Spitzer, Hannah B.
Meagher, Rebecca K.
Proudfoot, Kathryn L.
author_facet Spitzer, Hannah B.
Meagher, Rebecca K.
Proudfoot, Kathryn L.
author_sort Spitzer, Hannah B.
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9704605
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97046052022-11-29 The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review Spitzer, Hannah B. Meagher, Rebecca K. Proudfoot, Kathryn L. PLoS One Research Article 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. Public Library of Science 2022-11-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9704605/ /pubmed/36441732 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277665 Text en © 2022 Spitzer et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Spitzer, Hannah B.
Meagher, Rebecca K.
Proudfoot, Kathryn L.
The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review
title The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review
title_full The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review
title_fullStr The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review
title_full_unstemmed The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review
title_short The impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: A scoping review
title_sort impact of providing hiding spaces to farmed animals: a scoping review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9704605/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36441732
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277665
work_keys_str_mv AT spitzerhannahb theimpactofprovidinghidingspacestofarmedanimalsascopingreview
AT meagherrebeccak theimpactofprovidinghidingspacestofarmedanimalsascopingreview
AT proudfootkathrynl theimpactofprovidinghidingspacestofarmedanimalsascopingreview
AT spitzerhannahb impactofprovidinghidingspacestofarmedanimalsascopingreview
AT meagherrebeccak impactofprovidinghidingspacestofarmedanimalsascopingreview
AT proudfootkathrynl impactofprovidinghidingspacestofarmedanimalsascopingreview