A potentially painful experience may modify normal behavioural responses. To gauge the importance of pain relative to predation or social status, we presented competing stimuli, a predator cue or an unfamiliar social group, to two groups of noxiously treated rainbow trout, Oncorhynchus mykiss. In the predator cue experiment, fish were classified as bold or shy. Noxiously stimulated fish did not show antipredator responses, suggesting that pain is the imperative. In the social status experiment, noxiously stimulated fish held individually and undisturbed showed an increase in respiration rate and plasma cortisol. As a comparison, we used the dominant or subordinate fish in a group as the noxiously stimulated fish. After the noxious treatment, we returned this test fish to a familiar or unfamiliar social group. Neither dominants nor subordinates showed a negative change in physiology compared to their controls. However, in a familiar group the dominant was much less aggressive, suggesting a behavioural impairment in response to noxious stimulation. In an unfamiliar group, no reduction of aggression was seen, suggesting that maintaining dominance status took priority over showing signs of pain. These findings may reflect an ability to prioritize motivational drivers in fish, and as such provides evidence for central processing of pain rather than merely showing a nociceptive reflex. In animal models of pain, exposure to a new circumstance or a potentially fear-inducing or stressful situation reduces pain reactivity (e.g.
Extensive sheep farming systems make an important contribution to socioeconomic well-being and the 'ecosystem services' that flow from large areas of the UK and elsewhere. They are therefore subject to much policy intervention. However, the animal welfare implications of such interventions and their economic drivers are rarely considered. Under Defra project AW1024 (a further study to assess the interaction between economics, husbandry and animal welfare in large, extensively managed sheep flocks) we therefore assessed the interaction between profit and animal welfare on extensive sheep farms. A detailed inventory of resources, resource deployment and technical performance was constructed for 20 commercial extensive sheep farms in Great Britain (equal numbers from the Scottish Highlands, Cumbria, Peak District and mid-Wales). Farms were drawn from focus groups in these regions where participative research with farmers added further information. These data were summarised and presented to a panel of 12 experts for welfare assessment. We used two welfare assessment methods one drawn from animal welfare science ('needs' based) the other from management science (Service Quality Modelling). The methods gave complementary results. The inventory data were also used to build a linear programme (LP) model of sheep, labour and feed-resource management monthby-month on each farm throughout the farming year. By setting the LP to adjust farm management to maximise gross margin under each farm's circumstances we had an objective way to explore resource allocations, their constraints and welfare implications under alternative policy response scenarios. Regression of indicators of extensification (labour per ewe, in-bye land per ewe, hill area per ewe and lambs weaned per ewe) on overall welfare score explained 0.66 of variation with labour and lambs weaned per ewe both positive coefficients. Neither gross margin nor flock size were correlated with welfare score. Gross margin was also uncorrelated with these indicators of extensification with the exception of labour/ewe, which was negatively correlated with flock size and hence with gross margin. These results suggest animal welfare is best served by reduced extensification while greater profits are found in flock expansion with reduced labour input per ewe and no increase in other inputs or in productivity. Such potential conflicts should be considered as policy adjusts to meet the requirements for sustainable land use in the hills and uplands.
SummaryFarming practices that lead to declining returns and inputs of carbon to soils pose a threat to key soil functions. The EU FP7 interdisciplinary project SmartSOIL is using scientific testing and modeling to identify management practices that can optimise soil carbon storage and crop productivity. A consultation with advisors and policymakers in six European case study regions seeks to identify barriers to, and incentives for, uptake of such practices. Results from preliminary interviews are reported. Overall advisor and farmer awareness of management practices specifically directed towards soil carbon is low. Most production‐related decisions are taken in the short term, but managing soil carbon needs a long‐term approach. Key barriers to uptake of practices include: perceived scientific uncertainty about the efficacy of practices; lack of real life ‘best practice’ examples to show farmers; difficulty in demonstrating the positive effects of soil carbon management practices and economic benefits over a long time scale; and advisors being unable to provide suitable advice due to inadequate information or training. Most farmers are unconvinced of the economic benefits of practices for managing soil carbon. Incentives are therefore needed, either as subsidies or as evidence of the cost effectiveness of practices. All new measures and advice should be integrated into existing programmes to avoid a fragmented policy approach.
The welfare consequences of long-distance transportation of animals remain a controversial topic. Animals that stand for most of the long journey (especially if additional muscular activity is required to deal with postural instability) are at risk of developing fatigue. Previous observational studies of behaviour and physiology suggested either that sheep do not become markedly fatigued by long journeys or that previous methods did not adequately identify fatigue. A range of behavioural and physiological measures were made on eight pairs of sheep during and after treadmill exercise. Within each pair of sheep, a treatment sheep was walked on a treadmill at 0.5 m/s for up to 5 h or until the sheep voluntarily stopped exercising or showed other signs of reduced performance, and a control sheep was exercised for two 10-min periods on either side of the exercise period for the treatment sheep. With the exception of one sheep that only walked for 4.5 h, all treatment sheep walked for 5 h without apparent difficulty. After exercise, the plasma cortisol concentration of treatment sheep was significantly greater than that of control sheep. However, there were no significant treatment effects on plasma creatine kinase activity or blood lactate concentration. After 5 h of exercise, there was a proportionate decrease in the median frequency of the electromyogram recorded over the m. semitendinosus, and this was significantly different from control sheep. There was no evidence that treatment sheep lay down sooner or for longer after treadmill exercise than controls. In sheep tested in a maze to examine whether there was increased motivation to rest after exercise, there was no significant difference between the times taken by treatment and control sheep to obtain a food reward. Qualitative behavioural assessment of the sheep by a panel of observers identified two main dimensions of sheep demeanour, but among descriptors elicited from observers only one person used a term associated with fatigue. No significant difference was found between the scores of treatment and control sheep on these two demeanour dimensions. Thus, there was little evidence that prolonged gentle walking exercise fatigues sheep. Further development of methods to both repeatedly induce and to identify fatigue in sheep is required.
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 © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.