V-QBA vs. QBA—How Do Video and Live Analysis Compare for Qualitative Behaviour Assessment?

Abstract

Animal welfare is an inextricable part of livestock production and sustainability. Assessing welfare, beyond physical indicators of health, is challenging and often relies on qualitative techniques. Behaviour is a key component of welfare to consider and Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) aims to achieve this by systematically scoring behaviour across specific terms. In recent years, numerous studies have conducted QBA by using video footage, however, the method was not originally developed using video and video QBA (V-QBA) requires validation. Forty live QBAs were conducted, by two assessors, on housed beef cattle to help fill this validation gap. Video was recorded over the assessment period and a second video assessment was conducted. Live and video scores for each term were compared for both correlation and significant difference. Principle component analysis (PCA) was then conducted and correlations and differences between QBA and V-QBA for the first two components were calculated. Of the 20 terms, three were removed due to an overwhelming majority of scores of zero. Of the remaining 17 terms, 12 correlated significantly, and a significant pairwise difference was found for one (“Bored”). QBA and V-QBA results correlated across both PC1 (defined as “arousal”) and PC2 (defined as “mood”). Whilst there was no significant difference between the techniques for PC1, there was for PC2, with V-QBA generally yielding lower scores than QBA. Furthermore, based on PC1 and PC2, corresponding QBA and V-QBA scores were significantly closer than would be expected at random. Results found broad agreement between QBA and V-QBA at both univariate and multivariate levels. However, the lack of absolute agreement and muted V-QBA results for PC2 mean that caution should be taken when implementing V-QBA and that it should ideally be treated independently from live QBA until further evidence is published. Future research should focus on a greater variety of animals, environments, and assessors to address further validation of the method.

Comparison of the welfare of beef cattle in housed and grazing systems: hormones, health and behaviour

“…During winter, QBA outcomes of both herds were similar, reflecting their comparable housing. The dispersal was relatively broad across PC1 and PC2, similar to results by Cooke et al . (2022) that assessed a previous years cohort of cattle in the same facilities.…”

“…Assessments were conducted by a single assessor with previous experience conducting QBA on beef cattle and who is a qualified professional in animal science with approximately seven years’ experience. In previous studies ( Cooke et al ., 2022 ) the assessor showed a very high level of inter-observer reliability (0.78-0.87) with other assessors. Assessments were conducted during daylight hours and both herds were observed within a 30-minute window on any given day, excluding the short windows during which husbandry activities (bedding, cleaning, feed being added) were actively occurring.…”

“…Behavioural assessment, on the other hand, is an element that can provide insights into the behavioural domain of animal welfare. In recent years, Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) ( Wemelsfelder, 2008 ) has become a popular approach both academically and commercially ( Battini et al ., 2018 ; Ceballos et al ., 2021 ; Cooke et al ., 2022 ; Fleming et al ., 2016 ; Waitrose & Partners, 2021 ). The method has also shown potential in the detection of illness (Health ‘domain’), such as mastitis ( de Boyer des Roches et al ., 2018 ), though studies investigating correlations with other health, clinical, and welfare indicators have yielded mixed results ( Battini et al ., 2018 ; Brscic et al ., 2009 ).…”

“…Animal welfare is an important component of decision making on farms and is something desired by consumers and wider society (Rivero and Lee, 2022). Within beef systems, one of the most critical decisions to be made is the extent to which cattle are housed or grazing on pasture.…”

A systematic approach to defining and verifying descriptors used in the Qualitative Behavioural Assessment of sows

“…A good agreement was reached on PC2 that is more related to the arousal of emotions. The valence-arousal interpretation of emotional affect is frequently used in animal welfare and behaviour research (Mendl et al 2010 ), and common across QBA studies in both pigs (Wemelsfelder & Millard 2009 ; Temple et al 2013 ; Oldham et al 2021 ) and other species (Diaz-Lundahl et al 2019 ; Cooke et al 2022 ; Travnik et al. 2022 ).…”