Associations between animal welfare indicators and Campylobacter spp. in broiler chickens under commercial settings: A case study

2017 ◽  
Vol 147 ◽  
pp. 186-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene Alpigiani ◽  
Josè Cortinas Abrahantes ◽  
Virginie Michel ◽  
Adeline Huneau-Salaün ◽  
Marianne Chemaly ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Broiler Chickens ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Campylobacter Spp

scholarly journals Animal Welfare Assessment of Fattening Pigs: A Case Study on Sample Validity

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mareike Pfeifer ◽  
Armin Otto Schmitt ◽  
Engel Friederike Hessel
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Random Sample ◽  
Mean Squared Error ◽  
Sampling Strategies ◽  
Welfare Assessment ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Squared Error ◽  
Animal Welfare Assessment ◽  
Fattening Pigs

A guide for animal welfare assessment of fattening pigs recommends recording some of the indicators for a sample of the animals from a herd. However, it is not certain whether the herd’s level of welfare can be correctly judged using a random sample. Therefore, both the true prevalences of welfare indicators in a full census and the estimated prevalences of the indicators based upon simulated samples taken according to five strategies (termed S1 to S5) were determined. Deviations from the true level of animal welfare in the herd due to the sampling were recorded and analyzed. Depending on the strategy, between 12% and 43% of the samples over- or underestimated the true prevalences by more than 50%. The validity of the sampling strategies was evaluated using the normalized root-mean-squared error (NRMSE) and the relative bias (RB). In terms of accuracy, the strategies differed only slightly (between NRMSE = 0.13 for S2 and NRMSE = 0.19 for S4). However, the strategies varied more obviously regarding the bias (between RB = −0.0002 for S1 and RB = −0.0370 for S5). The described results are the outcome of an initial case study on the sample validity of the indicators and have to be verified using the data of more herds.

scholarly journals Behaviour and animal welfare indicators of broiler chickens housed in an enriched environment

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. e0256963
Author(s):  
Marconi Italo Lourenço da Silva ◽  
Ibiara Correia de Lima Almeida Paz ◽  
Gustavo Henrique Coelho Chaves ◽  
Ianê Correia de Lima Almeida ◽  
Caio Cesar dos Ouros ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Broiler Chickens ◽  
Environmental Enrichment ◽  
Exploratory Activity ◽  
Gallus Gallus Domesticus ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Play Fighting ◽  
Behavioural Characteristics ◽  
Experimental Treatments ◽  
Fighting Behaviour

The present study aimed to assess the influence of adding straw bales, step platforms, and laser projectors as environmental enrichment resources on the behaviour and welfare indicators of broiler chickens (Gallus gallus domesticus). A sample of 4,000 day-old male Cobb® 500 birds was used. The experimental treatments consisted of No Environmental Enrichment (NEE)—similar to a conventional environment; and Environmental Enrichment (EE)—environment enriched with straw bales, step platforms, and laser projectors, with four replicates per treatment of 500 animals. Behavioural characteristics (ethological observation through cameras, grab test, and modified touch test) and animal welfare indicators (pododermatitis and dorsal cranial myopathy) were assessed. The birds submitted to the EE treatment exhibited greater exploratory activity and expression of behaviours associated with comfort and welfare, whereas those in the NEE group were less active. Locomotion and play fighting behaviour decreased and behaviours associated with comfort increased as age advanced. The frequencies of interaction with laser spots and birds lying around straw bales were the highest in the 1st week (P<0.01). The behaviours of pecking at straw bales (P<0.0004), using the step platforms (P = 0.0001) and being on top of straw bales (P<0.0002) gradually increased. The chickens accessed the feeding troughs the most in the period of 0800 hours (P<0.0001) and expressed the highest frequencies of behaviours associated with comfort in the 1400 hours and 1700 hours periods. The birds in the EE group were calmer in face of human presence and touch and scored higher in animal welfare indicators. Adding straw bales, step platforms, and laser projectors increased locomotion, reduced expression of fear, and improved animal welfare indicators of broiler chickens.

Effective Altruism

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Poverty Alleviation ◽  
Future Generations ◽  
Global Poverty ◽  
Global Community ◽  
Helping Others ◽  
The World ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Effective Altruism

The effective altruism movement consists of a growing global community of people who organize significant parts of their lives around two key ideas, represented in its name. Altruism: If we use a significant portion of the resources in our possession—whether money, time, or talents—with a view to helping others, we can improve the world considerably. Effectiveness: When we do put such resources to altruistic use, it is crucial to focus on how much good this or that intervention is reasonably expected to do per unit of resource expended (for example, per dollar donated). While global poverty is a widely used case study in introducing and motivating effective altruism, if the ultimate aim is to do the most good one can with the resources expended, it is far from obvious that global poverty alleviation is highest priority cause area. In addition to ranking possible poverty-alleviation interventions against one another, we can also try to rank interventions aimed at very different types of outcome against one another. This includes, for example, interventions focusing on animal welfare or future generations. The scale and organization of the effective altruism movement encourage careful dialogue on questions that have perhaps long been there, throwing them into new and sharper relief, and giving rise to previously unnoticed questions. In the present volume, the first of its kind, a group of internationally recognized philosophers, economists, and political theorists contribute in-depth explorations of issues that arise once one takes seriously the twin ideas of altruistic commitment and effectiveness.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Inter-Observer Reliability of Animal Welfare Indicators: Which Is the Best Index to Use?

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 1445
Author(s):  
Mauro Giammarino ◽  
Silvana Mattiello ◽  
Monica Battini ◽  
Piero Quatto ◽  
Luca Maria Battaglini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Confidence Intervals ◽  
Bootstrap Method ◽  
Dairy Goat ◽  
Microsoft Excel ◽  
Bootstrap Methods ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Observer Reliability ◽  
High Concordance ◽  
Variance Estimates

This study focuses on the problem of assessing inter-observer reliability (IOR) in the case of dichotomous categorical animal-based welfare indicators and the presence of two observers. Based on observations obtained from Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) project surveys conducted on nine dairy goat farms, and using udder asymmetry as an indicator, we compared the performance of the most popular agreement indexes available in the literature: Scott’s π, Cohen’s k, kPABAK, Holsti’s H, Krippendorff’s α, Hubert’s Γ, Janson and Vegelius’ J, Bangdiwala’s B, Andrés and Marzo’s ∆, and Gwet’s γ(AC1). Confidence intervals were calculated using closed formulas of variance estimates for π, k, kPABAK, H, α, Γ, J, ∆, and γ(AC1), while the bootstrap and exact bootstrap methods were used for all the indexes. All the indexes and closed formulas of variance estimates were calculated using Microsoft Excel. The bootstrap method was performed with R software, while the exact bootstrap method was performed with SAS software. k, π, and α exhibited a paradoxical behavior, showing unacceptably low values even in the presence of very high concordance rates. B and γ(AC1) showed values very close to the concordance rate, independently of its value. Both bootstrap and exact bootstrap methods turned out to be simpler compared to the implementation of closed variance formulas and provided effective confidence intervals for all the considered indexes. The best approach for measuring IOR in these cases is the use of B or γ(AC1), with bootstrap or exact bootstrap methods for confidence interval calculation.

scholarly journals Animal welfare indicators for sheep during sea transport: the effect of voyage day and time of day

2021 ◽  
pp. 105304
Author(s):  
Renee S. Willis ◽  
Patricia A. Fleming ◽  
Emma J. Dunston-Clarke ◽  
Anne L. Barnes ◽  
David W. Miller ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Time Of Day ◽  
Sea Transport ◽  
Welfare Indicators

scholarly journals Interspecies Sustainability to Ensure Animal Protection: Lessons from the Thoroughbred Racing Industry

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (19) ◽  
pp. 5539 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bergmann
Keyword(s):  
Great Britain ◽  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Animal Protection ◽  
Sustainability Transition ◽  
Animal Advocacy ◽  
The Us ◽  
Original Contribution ◽  
Industry Sustainability ◽  
Thoroughbred Racing

There is a disconnect between dominant conceptions of sustainability and the protection of animals arising from the anthropocentric orientation of most conceptualisations of sustainability, including sustainable development. Critiques of this disconnect are primarily based in the context of industrial animal agriculture and a general model of a species-inclusive conception of sustainability has yet to emerge. The original contribution of this article is two-fold: First, it develops a theoretical framework for interspecies sustainability. Second, it applies this to a case study of the thoroughbred racing industry. Interviews were conducted with thoroughbred industry and animal advocacy informants in the US, Australia and Great Britain. While industry informants claim thoroughbred welfare is seminal for industry sustainability, they adopt a market-oriented anthropocentric conception of sustainability and do not consider animal welfare a sustainability domain in its own right. Animal advocacy informants demonstrate a deeper understanding of welfare but some express discomfort about linking sustainability, welfare and racing. Eight analytical layers have been identified in the discourse in the interface of sustainability and animal protection, of which two have transformational potential to advance interspecies sustainability. Interspecies sustainability urgently needs to be advanced to ensure animal protection in the sustainability transition, and to not leave the defining of animal welfare and sustainability to animal industries.

scholarly journals Association between animal welfare indicators and microbiological quality of beef carcasses, including Salmonella spp., from a slaughterhouse in Ecuador

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 918-925
Author(s):  
María Cevallos-Almeida ◽  
Ana Burgos-Mayorga ◽  
Carlos A. Gómez ◽  
José Luis Lema-Hurtado ◽  
Leydi Lema ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Animal Welfare ◽  
Microbiological Quality ◽  
Salmonella Spp ◽  
E Coli ◽  
Welfare Indicators ◽  
Beef Carcasses ◽  
Logistic Regressions ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Poor Management

Background and Aim: Pre-slaughter management and slaughter operations are considered critical factors for animal welfare and meat quality. Previous studies have found poor animal welfare management at municipal slaughterhouses in Ecuador, and little is known about how this affects the microbiological quality of the meat. Therefore, the aim of the study was to analyze the association of the microbiological quality of beef carcasses and animal welfare indicators in a municipal slaughterhouse in Ecuador. Materials and Methods: Data for 6 months were collected from a municipal slaughterhouse in Ecuador. Five trained researchers were strategically located along the slaughter process. A total of 351 animals were observed with regard to welfare indicators, and their carcasses were sampled to evaluate microbiological quality. Antemortem (slipping, falling, and vocalization) and postmortem animal welfare indicators (bleed interval, pH, temperature, and bruises) were measured. To determine the total aerobic bacteria (TAB) and Escherichia coli counts and the presence of Salmonella spp., we collected samples by swabbing four different points of each carcass. The association between microbiological quality and animal welfare indicators was studied using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. Results: The mean TAB count was 5.3 log CFU/cm2, and the mean total count of E. coli was 2.4 log CFU/cm2. Salmonella spp. were isolated in 3.1% of the carcasses. An electric goad was used in all animals, 19.1% slipped at least once, and 19.9% vocalized. The mean pH of the carcasses was 7.2, and 79.2% of carcasses had bruises. Multivariate analysis showed that Salmonella spp. and the TAB count were associated with pH and the number of bruises (p = 0.01 in both cases). Conclusion: Although there was non-significant association between the majority of animal welfare indicators and microbiological quality, the poor management affecting animal welfare and carcass hygiene are worrisome.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document