Understanding animal welfare

Fraser, David

doi:10.1186/1751-0147-50-s1-s1

Cited by 383 publications

(337 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

304

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Hansen and Berthelsen, 2000;Petherick, 2007;Lund et al, 2012). Such a state would indicate poor welfare and may also compromise scientific outcomes, as has been suggested for other species (Hansen and Berthelsen, 2000;Petherick, 2007;Fraser, 2008;Lund et al, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Measurement of cognitive bias and cortisol levels to evaluate the effects of space restriction on captive collared peccary (Mammalia, Tayassuidae)

Oliveira

Nogueira-Filho

Sousa

et al. 2016

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tWe use the judgement-bias paradigm to evaluate whether space restriction in metabolism pens affects the emotional state of collared peccary (Pecari tajacu) during a nutritional experiment. We trained individual adult males to 'go' to a specific location within 30 s when a positive auditory cue (whistle; CS+) was given in order to receive cassava root pieces as a reward, and to 'no-go' when a negative cue (caxixi percussion instrument; CS−) was sounded to avoid punishment (jet of water) and no reward. An 'ambiguous' auditory cue (a drumstick hitting an aluminum plate; CS A ) was presented to probe decision-making under ambiguity. Individuals were subjected to five 8-day housing conditions in the order: H1 (controlno space restriction-metabolism pen and additional area), H2 space restriction without environmental enrichment (metabolism pen only), H3 (control-no space restriction), H4 (space restriction with environmental enrichment), and H5 (control-no space restriction). On the eighth day of each housing condition, each animal was exposed to 10 judgement bias trials of each of the three cue types: CS+, CS−, and CS A . We recorded whether animals showed the 'go' or 'no-go' response after each type of cue and collected fecal samples to assess fecal glucocorticoid metabolite concentrations. Peccaries learnt to discriminate CS+ and CS− and maintained this discrimination during the five housing conditions tested. The response to the ambiguous cue (CS A ) varied according to the housing condition. During H1, the peccaries made a similar proportion of 'go' responses to all three types of cue (Ps > 0.07). During H2 and H3, 'go' responses to CSA and CS− cues occurred in similar proportions (Ps > 0.70), but peccaries showed more go responses to CS+ (Ps < 0.03) indicating that they were responding to CSA as if it were more likely to predict the waterjet than food. During H4 and H5, peccaries again made a similar proportion of 'go' responses to all three types of cue, as in H1. During H2 and H3, fecal glucocorticoid metabolite concentrations were higher than during the other tests (208.0 ± 16.4 vs. 141.6 ± 25.9 ngg −1 dry feces, Ps < 0.03). Our results suggest that space restriction may induce physiological stress and influence judgement bias and affective state in peccaries, and that these effects may be offset by environmental enrichment. However, the possibility of a general habituation to the housing conditions across time cannot be ruled out.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Measurement of cognitive bias and cortisol levels to evaluate the effects of space restriction on captive collared peccary (Mammalia, Tayassuidae)

Oliveira

Nogueira-Filho

Sousa

et al. 2016

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One has to bear in mind that the term animal welfare is not scientifically based but rather a term that arose from a debate in society (Keeling, 2005), as described in detail later on. Animal welfare can best be described by contemplating three different conceptions: (1) basic health and biologic functioning, which includes the physical well-being of the animal; (2) natural living, which concerns the possibility to express normal behaviour; and (3) the affective state, especially concerning positive emotions (Fraser, 2008). A veterinarian, on the one hand, may well focus on the health of the animals and thus claim that indoor housing systems provide better welfare as the animals can be kept free from parasitic infections more easily.…”

Section: Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An ethologist, on the other hand, may think of good welfare more in terms of the expression of normal behaviour, thus putting more emphasis on free range systems and considering parasitic infections as minor welfare problems. Despite this disagreement, all defenders of different conceptions may agree on certain factual issues such as the mortality rate (Fraser, 2008). The challenge of a comprising definition is, therefore, to find a basis of agreement on these three conceptions, which most scientific definitions try to take into account.…”

Section: Definitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But, in general, it was possible to obtain good agreement concerning the basic definition of animal welfare (Bock and van Leeuwen, 2005;Bock and Van Huik, 2007;Buller and Roe, 2008). The progress of finding an all-embracing definition took place in such a way that, at the beginning, animal scientists proposed a definition of animal welfare based on three conceptions -good health and biologic functioning, natural living and positive affective state (Fraser, 2008) -as well as on the five freedoms of the Farm Animal Welfare Council (FAWC, 1979). As a result, four main principles were identified: (1) good feeding, (2) good housing, (3) good health and (4) appropriate behaviour.…”

Section: Definition Of Welfare In Terms Of Wqmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of the assessment of animal welfare with special emphasis on the "Welfare Quality<sup>®</sup> animal welfare assessment protocol for growing pigs"

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper discusses the arising need for an objective, but feasible, reliable and valid method for assessing animal welfare on farms. Animal welfare has become especially important since the industrialisation of animal housing after the Second World War and as public awareness and concern has increased. Simultaneously, alienation of the public from agriculture has taken place, as the population has moved increasingly from rural areas to towns. This has led to a very emotional discussion concerning the welfare of farmed animals, and thus a need for not only a clear definition but also a way of objectively measuring it has arisen. It is probably best defined as a total of the different conceptions health, natural behaviour and positive affective state. In the last few years, different methods for an objective assessment have been developed; however, all of them still face great challenges in their practical implementation and acceptance. The most promising method is probably the Welfare Quality ® (WQ) approach, especially as it concentrates on animal-based parameters. The development of the WQ protocols emphasised not only the different conceptions of animal welfare but also especially the feasibility, reliability and validity of the parameters to be included. One of the main challenges of these protocols remains, however, the final aggregation of the results to a welfare score. Furthermore, a thorough cost-benefit analysis has not been carried out so far. Even more importantly, only a few studies have addressed the general reliability and validity of the complete protocols, and those studies that have addressed these issues have also revealed challenges concerning the interobserver and test-retest reliability of some of the included parameters. As an example, this is discussed in detail for the "Welfare Quality ® animal welfare assessment protocol for growing pigs". In conclusion, the WQ approach can be seen as promising, but it has also revealed that there are still a considerable number of challenges that need to be addressed in further studies on the WQ protocols in order to achieve constant improvement. These challenges should be borne in mind in the application of these protocols, which should not be simply referred to as a gold standard.

show abstract

“…Since animal welfare has become increasingly transparent, retailers, processing industries, restaurants and farmers are heavily affected by the public interest in animal welfare, and governments, NGOs and governmental and international organisations are increasingly involved in the debate on animal welfare [35]. Because the trade of animals and animal foodstuffs and the scientific domain of animal welfare are global, the subject area needs to embrace a global mindset and another prospective is that researchers and teachers in animal welfare bring the discussions and negotiations in a global community and context [33]. [36] and animal welfare is an aspect of sustainable development [34].…”

Section: A Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers’ Perceived Value, Motivations for and Adoption of Open Educational Resources in Animal and Food Sciences

Algers

Silva‐Fletcher²

2015

Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Teachers' motivations behind their view on valueand adoption of open educational resources (OER) were investigated based on 101 questionnaire answers from teachers in animal welfare, animal science and food science. A factor analysis uncovered the underlying dimensions for teachers' motives and indicated that they were complex and linked to subject area. Underlying dimensions for the motives to adopt OER were identified at three levels; individual (e.g. altruism), institutional (e.g. collaboration with peers), and societal (e.g. reaching beyond borders of the academy). The underlying dimensions for the inhibitors for adoption at individual and institutional level were challenges regarding individual competences, quality assessment and teaching practices. When using activity theory, an affinity space could be identified for teachers in animal welfare with its own norms and expectations with regards to the open educational practices. The results suggested that sharing for the benefit of others and collective collaboration with other peers were stronger incentives for teachers in the specific subject of animal welfare than it was for teachers in broader and less contested subject areas. Animal welfare teachers also had low agreement with problems such as OER being deviant to higher education and for being difficult to adapt to teaching context, and these teachers also had a higher adoption rate than other teachers. Furthermore, this study provides evidence that OER challenges the boundaries of higher education and that an affinity space can enable OER adoption.

show abstract

Understanding animal welfare

Cited by 383 publications

References 10 publications

Measurement of cognitive bias and cortisol levels to evaluate the effects of space restriction on captive collared peccary (Mammalia, Tayassuidae)

Measurement of cognitive bias and cortisol levels to evaluate the effects of space restriction on captive collared peccary (Mammalia, Tayassuidae)

Review of the assessment of animal welfare with special emphasis on the "Welfare Quality<sup>®</sup> animal welfare assessment protocol for growing pigs"

Teachers’ Perceived Value, Motivations for and Adoption of Open Educational Resources in Animal and Food Sciences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Understanding animal welfare

Cited by 383 publications

References 10 publications

Measurement of cognitive bias and cortisol levels to evaluate the effects of space restriction on captive collared peccary (Mammalia, Tayassuidae)

Measurement of cognitive bias and cortisol levels to evaluate the effects of space restriction on captive collared peccary (Mammalia, Tayassuidae)

Review of the assessment of animal welfare with special emphasis on the &quot;Welfare Quality&lt;sup&gt;®&lt;/sup&gt; animal welfare assessment protocol for growing pigs&quot;

Teachers’ Perceived Value, Motivations for and Adoption of Open Educational Resources in Animal and Food Sciences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Review of the assessment of animal welfare with special emphasis on the "Welfare Quality<sup>®</sup> animal welfare assessment protocol for growing pigs"