Characterization of Efficacy and Animal Safety across Four Caprine Disbudding Methodologies

Abstract

There is a strong industry demand for technically simple and highly efficacious alternatives to heat cautery disbudding in goat kids that can be performed as a stand-alone procedure without adjunct anesthesia, and that result in improved overall welfare through reduced acute pain, reduced tissues healing interval, and a consistent safety record. The objective of this study was to consider the net effect of disbudding techniques on goat welfare by examining vocalization frequency, long-term efficacy and animal safety associated with four alternative caprine disbudding methods against sham-disbudded and heat-cautery controls. Sixty-five commercial male dairy kids were disbudded at 3–10 days of age with one of six disbudding treatments (clove oil injection, caustic paste, two cryosurgical methods, heat-cautery, and sham procedure). Heat cautery was 91% effective, caustic paste was 55% effective, and the other treatments were ineffective. Heat cautery and sham procedures resulted in similar vocalization efforts; freezing with a liquid-nitrogen cooled iron resulted in significantly greater vocalization numbers. No unintended paste transfer injuries were observed with short-term application of the caustic paste. Heat cautery resulted in numerous superficial infections but no permanent injury. Clove oil injection was associated with several unexpected and severe complications including unintended tissue necrosis, temporary paresis, skull defects, meningitis, and death. Collectively, we did not find that any of the alternative methods of disbudding provided a feasible option over heat cautery to improve welfare.

Pain Assessment in Goat Kids: Focus on Disbudding

“…A summary of the pain behaviours was used to assign a score from the scale. Also, a vocalisation score, which is the total number of vocalizations during the disbudding procedure for both horn buds, was used to compare the alternative methods to cautery disbudding [58].…”

The Complex and Diverse Genetic Architecture of the Absence of Horns (Polledness) in Domestic Ruminants, including Goats and Sheep

“…For organic farming, the EU legislation prohibits dehorning as a routine treatment, but local authorities can authorize exceptions [28]. Even though dehorning is partly legal, it is associated with suffering and pain for the animal [17,29]. Therefore, the need for and interest in genetically polled animals is increasingly apparent.…”

Expression, Polymorphism, and Potential Functional Sites of the BMPR1A Gene in the Sheep Horn

“…Bruising reduces meat quality, and severe udder injuries, which may be the result of attack by a horned individual, reduce milk yield [ 7 ]. Although dehorning is legal in some countries, it can be painful and distressing for animals [ 8 , 9 ]. At the same time, horns are expensive to grow and require resources beyond those needed for maintenance or growth, especially during the winter months when they are a major source of energy expenditure for sheep [ 10 , 11 ].…”