Most of the research on animal welfare has focused on the negative aspects of the matter including an array of stress categories, whereas little has been done about the positive states of well being. The present study aims to describe indicators of positive animal welfare suitable for on-farm assessment. Appropriate environmental stimulation favours good welfare and, in an adequately enriched environment, positive indicators of welfare such as play behaviour tend to be more common. In addition, animals are motivated to perform these behaviours only if their primary needs are satisfied. In cattle, beneficial effects of social licking have been observed with positive correlation between being licked vs. milk production and weight gain, respectively. Ruminants are gregarious and a high degree of synchronisation within the herd may indicate a positive welfare state, in particular for subordinate animals. They may be able to meet their basic feeding and resting requirements performing these behaviours when the competition for a particular resource is low, however their welfare state would be improved if they could choose when and where (i.e. along with the other members of the group) to perform such behaviours. Due to the reduced applicability (mainly young animals), low feasibility (time consuming) and lack of research on reliability, play behaviour, albeit of proven validity, does not appear to be suitable for a rapid implementation in a welfare assessment scheme. Social licking is rarely expressed and its detection may be time consuming and scarcely feasible. Although validity and reliability need more studies, behaviour synchrony seems to be a promising positive welfare indicator as the instantaneous scan sampling technique makes this indicator easily applicable. Recently, a new methodology called "qualitative assessment of animal behaviour" has been developed. The method relies on a number of terms which are freely generated by observers. Thus, when positive aspects are observed they can be rated on a quantitative scale. Because of its high inter-and intra-observer reliability, this method appears to be the most promising.

To verify the effect of 2 housing systems (with and without a pool and an ample outdoor lot) on behavior and milk yield, 45 lactating buffalo cows were group-housed in a free stall open-sided barn with concrete floor where they received 10 m(2)/head as space allowance (group NP); 43 cows were group-housed in a similar barn, but had access to an outdoor yard (36 m(2)/head) and a concrete pool of 208 m(2) (group WP). Animals were subjected to 8 sessions of instantaneous scan sampling at approximately 10-d intervals. Behavioral variables were expressed as proportions of subjects observed in each category of posture and activity. In addition, rapid behaviors such as agonistic, social, and reproductive interactions, social licking, and self-grooming were recorded continuously. These variables were expressed as number of interactions per animal. At the end of each hour of observation, temperature and relative humidity were recorded. In WP the proportion of animals observed wallowing was 0.476 +/- 0.034, whereas lower proportions were observed standing (0.389 +/- 0.029) or lying (0.141 +/- 0.021) outside the pool. In NP the proportions of animals observed standing and lying were 0.452 +/- 0.042 and 0.548 +/- 0.042, respectively. A significant relationship between mean temperatures recorded on observation days and proportion of animals in the pool was observed (r(s) = 0.41). Fewer animals from group WP were observed idling compared with buffaloes from group NP (0.44 +/- 0.024 vs. 0.509 +/- 0.024, respectively), whereas more WP animals were involved in investigative activities than NP cows (0.099 +/- 0.009 vs. 0.042 +/- 0.009, respectively). A greater number of social interactions (sniffing and nuzzling) and social lickings were observed in group WP than in group NP (0.120 +/- 0.010 vs. 0.067 +/- 0.010, and 0.151 +/- 0.018 vs. 0.090 +/- 0.018, respectively). The WP buffalo cows had a greater milk yield than NP cows (11.73 +/- 0.31 vs. 10.78 +/- 0.28 kg/d, respectively), whereas no differences between groups were observed for protein (4.86 +/- 0.04 vs. 4.80 +/- 0.03% for WP and NP, respectively) and fat contents (8.49 +/- 0.14 vs. 8.38 +/- 0.13% for WP and NP, respectively). We conclude that the provision of a pool and an ample outdoor paddock can have beneficial effects on welfare and milk production of buffaloes.

No abstract

This review deals with the behaviour of river buffaloes (Bubalus bubalis), in confinement and in extensive conditions, also focusing on the effects of different housing and rearing conditions on their welfare. The behavioural repertoire expressed by buffaloes in extensive and intensive conditions is similar to those displayed by other domestic ruminants. However, through natural selection, buffaloes have also acquired several morphological, physiological and behavioural (i.e. wallowing) adaptations to hot climatic conditions. Buffaloes kept in intensive conditions and having no access to pasture and water for wallowing extend their periods of idling and are less often involved in investigative activities. Confinement is also associated with a reduction of space; however, no specific studies have been carried out to determine the specific requirements of this species. Space restriction can adversely affect various aspects of buffalo welfare, such as health (increased levels of lesions and injuries), social behaviour (increased number of agonistic interactions) and heat dissipation. The buffaloes, originating from tropical areas, are well adapted to large variations in food availability and quality, and to dietetic unbalances. As to human animal relationship, it has been observed that the incidence of stepping and kicking behaviour of buffaloes in the milking parlour is positively correlated with the frequency of oxytocin injections, whereas the frequency of positive stockperson interactions with the animals such as talking quietly, petting and gentle touching are negatively correlated with the number of kicks during milking. Data from farms where both dairy cattle and buffaloes are present show that avoidance distance measured in the pen is lower in buffaloes than in cattle. This may be attributed to the fact that buffaloes are generally recognised to be curious animals. Finally, the effects of different farming practices on animal-related indicators are described. However, these measures should be integrated into a monitoring protocol, such as the Welfare Quality R scheme, to reliably assess buffalo welfare in the current intensive farming conditions.

No abstract