Adherence to basic animal welfare standards involves effective monitoring and control of pain, especially in a veterinary setting. Assessment relies on behavioural and physiological indicators. However, individual differences in physiology mediate consistent individual differences in behaviour, referred to as personality (Koolhaas et al., 1999). Therefore, personality may confound measurements of pain (Ijichi et al., 2014). The current work is a preliminary investigation into whether Extraversion and Neuroticism are associated with differences in individual behavioural and physiological responses to pain. Twenty dogs were observed during recovery from routine castration in a clinical setting. Core temperature was recorded using Infrared Thermography (IRT) (Stewart et al., 2008) upon admission, 15 minutes postextubation and every 30 minutes thereafter, until the subject was collected by their owner. Behaviour during recovery was scored using Short Form Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale (Reid et al., 2007) at the same intervals as IRT readings. Personality was measured using Monash Canine Personality Questionnaire-Revised (Ley et al., 2009) and owners rated their dog's tolerance to pain on a five-point Likert scale. Pain score did not have an association with eye temperature discrepancy or core temperature changes from control, indicating it may not predict affective response to pain. More highly extravert subjects had significantly higher pain scores (p = 0.031), despite experiencing similar tissue damage. More extravert subjects showed significantly greater right eye temperature (p = 0.035), suggesting hemispheric dominance. Neuroticism had no association with physiological or behavioural responses to pain. Finally, owners were not able to predict their dog's behavioural or physiological response to pain. These results indicate that personality may be a useful clinical tool for assessing individual differences in response to pain, whilst owner ratings of their dog's response is not reliable.

Dogs may experience negative emotional states when isolated from human caregivers and conspecifics. This study aimed to evaluate how dogs interact with different enrichments during a short period of social isolation, as a first step towards identifying methods for improving their emotional wellbeing. Using a cross-over design, dogs (n = 20) at the Waltham Petcare Science Institute were exposed to four different food-based enrichments while left alone in a familiar room for 20 min: long-lasting chew (Chew), kibble in a treat-dispensing toy (Toy), and kibble dispensed through a smart treat-dispensing device with (Device + Voice) and without (Device) a person talking to the dog. Time spent engaging with each enrichment item and emotional valence and arousal (7-point scale collected every 5-min) were scored from videos. The results of linear mixed models indicated Chew was the most successful enrichment, with dogs having lower arousal scores (p < 0.05 vs. Device and Toy) during the first five minutes of isolation, higher positive valence scores (p < 0.05 vs. all) during the second five minutes of isolation, and spending the most total time engaged (p < 0.01 vs. all). Based on these findings, long-lasting chews should be further explored to assess their impact on dog emotional wellbeing.

Young researchers speak with a common voice as key questions about women in science and early career researchers go unanswered by MPs.

“The Government did not consider enough evidence in its decision-making… Examining the possible impacts of a decision after the decision has been made contradicts the concept of evidence informing policy.” House of Commons Science and Technology Committee report into the closure of the Forensic Science Service.

Two recent events highlight the power of human capital in UK science to challenge government and produce world-class research.