Simple summaryIntensive farming systems are confronted with a number of animal welfare issues such as injuries from horns in cattle and feather pecking in poultry. To solve these problems, mutilating procedures, such as dehorning in cattle and goats and beak trimming in laying hens, are applied routinely. These and other procedures such as early maternal separation, overcrowding, and barren housing conditions impair animal welfare. Scientific underpinning of the efficacy of these interventions and management practices is poor. We advocate that all stakeholders, in particular animal scientists and veterinarians, take the lead in evaluating common, putative mutilating and welfare reducing procedures and management practices to develop better, scientifically supported alternatives, focused on adaptation of the environment to the animals, to ensure uncompromised animal welfare.AbstractA number of mutilating procedures, such as dehorning in cattle and goats and beak trimming in laying hens, are common in farm animal husbandry systems in an attempt to prevent or solve problems, such as injuries from horns or feather pecking. These procedures and other practices, such as early maternal separation, overcrowding, and barren housing conditions, raise concerns about animal welfare. Efforts to ensure or improve animal welfare involve adapting the animal to its environment, i.e., by selective breeding (e.g., by selecting “robust” animals) adapting the environment to the animal (e.g., by developing social housing systems in which aggressive encounters are reduced to a minimum), or both. We propose adapting the environment to the animals by improving management practices and housing conditions, and by abandoning mutilating procedures. This approach requires the active involvement of all stakeholders: veterinarians and animal scientists, the industrial farming sector, the food processing and supply chain, and consumers of animal-derived products. Although scientific evidence about the welfare effects of current practices in farming such as mutilating procedures, management practices, and housing conditions is steadily growing, the gain in knowledge needs a boost through more scientific research. Considering the huge number of animals whose welfare is affected, all possible effort must be made to improve their welfare as quickly as possible in order to ban welfare-compromising procedures and practices as soon as possible.
Feather pecking is a prominent issue in the commercial egg industry, associated with economic losses and welfare problems. A non-systematic literature search suggests that studies on feather pecking are predominantly concerned with applied research goals. That is to say, they aim to solve or diminish the effects of this problematic behavior by orienting towards practical approaches. The strong emphasis on this research approach has skewed our knowledge of the causes of feather pecking in relation to welfare. While the need for such research is high, there is an equivalent need for basic research that has not received corresponding effort. Also, current research predominantly focuses on the negative effects on the birds being pecked, whereas too little attention is given to the possible welfare problems of the peckers. We argue that more basic research is needed for obtaining comprehensive science-based knowledge of behavioral needs and abilities of hens, in particular with respect to behavioral problems that threaten their welfare.
Translating theoretical concepts of animal welfare into quantitative assessment protocols is an ongoing challenge. Glucocorticoids (GCs) are frequently used as physiological measure in welfare assessment. The interpretation of levels of GCs and especially their relation to welfare, however, is not as straightforward, questioning the informative power of GCs. The aim of this systematic mapping review was therefore to provide an overview of the relevant literature to identify global patterns in studies using GCs as proxy for the assessment of welfare of vertebrate species. Following a systematic protocol and a-priory inclusion criteria, 509 studies with 517 experiments were selected for data extraction. The outcome of the experiments was categorized based on whether the intervention significantly affected levels of GCs, and whether these effects were accompanied by changes in behavior, morphology and physiology. Additional information, such as animal species, type of intervention, experimental set up and sample type used for GC determination was extracted, as well. Given the broad scope and large variation in included experiments, meta-analyses were not performed, but outcomes are presented to encourage further, in-depth analyses of the data set. The interventions did not consistently lead to changes in GCs with respect to the original authors hypothesis. Changes in GCs were not consistently paralleled by changes in additional assessment parameter on behavior, morphology and physiology. The minority of experiment quantified GCs in less invasive sample matrices compared to blood. Interventions showed a large variability, and species such as fish were underrepresented, especially in the assessment of behavior. The inconclusive effects on GCs and additional assessment parameter urges for further validation of techniques and welfare proxies. Several conceptual and technical challenges need to be met to create standardized and robust welfare assessment protocols and to determine the role of GCs herein.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.