Cooke, Andrew (author), Mullan, Siobhan (author), Morten, Charlie (author), Hockenhull, Joanna (author), Le-Grice, Phil (author), Le Cocq, Kate (author), Lee, Michael R. F. (author), Cardenas, Laura M. (author), and Rivero, M. Jordana (author)
Format:
Journal article
Publication Date:
2023-06-29
Published:
United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 206 Document Number: D12951
14 pages, Animal welfare encompasses all aspects of an animal’s life and the interactions between animals. Consequently, welfare must be measured across a variety of factors that consider aspects
such as health, behaviour and mental state. Decisions regarding housing and grazing are central to farm management. In this study, two beef cattle systems and their herds were compared
from weaning to slaughter across numerous indicators. One herd (‘HH’) were continuously
housed, the other (‘HG’) were housed only during winter. Inspections of animals were conducted to assess body condition, cleanliness, diarrhoea, hairlessness, nasal discharge and ocular discharge. Hair and nasal mucus samples were taken for quantification of cortisol and
serotonin. Qualitative behaviour assessments (QBA) were also conducted and performance
monitored. Physical health indicators were similar between herds with the exception of
nasal discharge which was more prevalent in HH (P < 0.001). During winter, QBA yielded differences between herds over PC1 (arousal) (P = 0.032), but not PC2 (mood) (P = 0.139).
Through summer, there was a strong difference across both PC1 (P < 0.001) and PC2 (P =
0.002), with HG exhibiting more positive behaviour. A difference was found in hair cortisol
levels, with the greatest concentrations observed in HG (P = 0.011), however such a pattern
was not seen for nasal mucus cortisol or for serotonin. Overall, providing summer grazing
(HG) appeared to afford welfare benefits to the cattle as shown with more positive QBA
assessments, but also slightly better health indicators, notwithstanding the higher levels of cortisol in that group.
318 pages., Book in the University of Illinois online collection. Search other sources or contact ACDC., Pages 37-51 in Ferguson, D.; Lee, Caroline; and Fisher, Andrew. 2017. Advances in sheep welfare. Woodhead Publishing, Duxford, United Kingdom.
Holt, Jessica (author) and Cartmell, Dwayne (author)
Format:
Paper
Publication Date:
2012-02
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 188 Document Number: D01526
Notes:
Paper presented in the Agricultural Communications Section of the Southern Association of Agricultural Scientists annual meeting in Birmingham, Alabama, February 5-6, 2012. 24 pages.
Lusk, Jayson L. (author / Oklahoma State University), Norwood, F. Bailey (author / Oklahoma State University), and Prickett, Robert W. (author / Oklahoma State University)
Format:
Research report
Publication Date:
2007-08-17
Published:
USA
Location:
Agricultural Communications Documentation Center, Funk Library, University of Illinois Box: 85 Document Number: D10852
Notes:
Working paper, Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater. 33 pages.
17 pages, The rise in the demand for animal products due to demographic and dietary changes has exacerbated difficulties in addressing societal concerns related to the environment, human health, and animal welfare. As a response to this challenge, Precision Livestock Farming (PLF) technologies are being developed to monitor animal health and welfare parameters in a continuous and automated way, offering the opportunity to improve productivity and detect health issues at an early stage. However, ethical concerns have been raised regarding their potential to facilitate the management of production systems that are potentially harmful to animal welfare, or to impact the human-animal relationship and farmers' duty of care. Using the Five Domains Model (FDM) as a framework, the aim is to explore the potential of PLF to help address animal welfare and to discuss potential welfare benefits and risks of using such technology. A variety of technologies are identified and classified according to their type [sensors, bolus, image or sound based, Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)], their development stage, the species they apply to, and their potential impact on welfare. While PLF technologies have promising potential to reduce the occurrence of diseases and injuries in livestock farming systems, their current ability to help promote positive welfare states remains limited, as technologies with such potential generally remain at earlier development stages. This is likely due to the lack of evidence related to the validity of positive welfare indicators as well as challenges in technology adoption and development. Finally, the extent to which welfare can be improved will also strongly depend on whether management practices will be adapted to minimize negative consequences and maximize benefits to welfare.
