Animal-Based Indicators for On-Farm Welfare Assessment in Sheep.
animal-based
assessment
indicators
on-farm
protocols
sheep
small ruminants
welfare
Journal
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
Titre abrégé: Animals (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101635614
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Oct 2021
15 Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
07
09
2021
revised:
24
09
2021
accepted:
27
09
2021
entrez:
23
10
2021
pubmed:
24
10
2021
medline:
24
10
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The value society assigns to animal welfare in agricultural productions is increasing, resulting in ever-enhancing methods to assess the well-being of farm animals. The aim of this study was to review the scientific literature to obtain an overview of the current knowledge on welfare assessments for sheep and to extract animal-based welfare indicators as well as welfare protocols with animal-based indicators. By title and abstract screening, we identified five protocols and 53 potential indicators from 55 references. Three out of the five protocols include animal-based as well as resource-based indicators. All of them were assessed as being practicable on-farm but lacking reliability. Some of the single indicators are endorsed by the literature and widely used in the field like assessment of behaviour, lameness or body condition score. Others (e.g., Faffa Malan Chart FAMACHA©, dag score or pain assessment) are regularly mentioned in the literature, but their reliability and usefulness are still subject of discussion. Several indicators, such as pruritic behaviour, eye condition, lying time or tooth loss are relatively new in the literature and still lack evidence for their validity and usefulness. This literature review serves as a starting point for the development of valid and practicable welfare protocols for sheep.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34679992
pii: ani11102973
doi: 10.3390/ani11102973
pmc: PMC8532706
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : Federal Office for Agriculture
ID : 1.18.14TG
Organisme : Federal Food Safety and Veterinary Office
ID : 1.18.14TG
Références
Vet Parasitol. 2012 Jun 8;187(1-2):275-9
pubmed: 22270033
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2015;18(3):269-86
pubmed: 25695526
J Anim Sci. 1997 Jan;75(1):266-72
pubmed: 9027575
Appl Anim Behav Sci. 2001 Feb 16;71(1):43-55
pubmed: 11179558
Vet J. 2015 Dec;206(3):289-97
pubmed: 26598787
Vet J. 2012 Jul;193(1):257-63
pubmed: 22266020
PLoS One. 2019 Jun 19;14(6):e0218603
pubmed: 31216326
Int J Parasitol. 2007 Sep;37(11):1255-68
pubmed: 17517413
Animal. 2015 May;9(5):878-87
pubmed: 25583376
J Appl Anim Welf Sci. 2015;18(2):119-32
pubmed: 25603304
Vet Parasitol. 2019 Feb;266:67-72
pubmed: 30736949
Acta Biotheor. 2011 Jun;59(2):121-37
pubmed: 21347723
Vet Parasitol. 2018 Feb 15;251:106-111
pubmed: 29426465
Vet Parasitol. 1999 Jun 30;83(3-4):291-300
pubmed: 10423010
In Pract. 1984 May;6(3):91-3
pubmed: 6735487
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 19;12(4):e0175839
pubmed: 28422994
Front Vet Sci. 2017 Dec 11;4:210
pubmed: 29322048
Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 2019 Feb 28;86(1):e1-e3
pubmed: 30843409
Vet Parasitol. 2015 Sep 15;212(3-4):188-92
pubmed: 26223154
Vet J. 2008 Jun;176(3):378-84
pubmed: 17451978
Dev Psychobiol. 2003 Mar;42(2):131-47
pubmed: 12555278
Vet Parasitol. 2009 Dec 3;166(1-2):108-11
pubmed: 19699035
Animals (Basel). 2019 Aug 17;9(8):
pubmed: 31426493
Onderstepoort J Vet Res. 2001 Sep;68(3):165-74
pubmed: 11769347
Vet Parasitol. 2007 Nov 10;149(3-4):251-7
pubmed: 17900811
Animals (Basel). 2018 Jan 08;8(1):
pubmed: 29316704
Vet Parasitol. 2015 Jan 15;207(1-2):85-93
pubmed: 25466619
Animal. 2011 May;5(6):943-52
pubmed: 22440034
Vet Rec. 2015 May 16;176(20):521
pubmed: 25724542
Animal. 2013 Jul;7(7):1182-90
pubmed: 23561038
Animals (Basel). 2017 Dec 24;8(1):
pubmed: 29295551
Vet J. 2009 May;180(2):189-94
pubmed: 18308594
Behav Processes. 2016 Nov;132:49-56
pubmed: 27693533