Feasibility and Reliability of the AWIN Welfare Assessment Protocol for Dairy Goats in Semi-extensive Farming Conditions.

Capra hircus animal welfare indicators extensive husbandry systems feasibility inter-observer reliability

Journal

Frontiers in veterinary science
ISSN: 2297-1769
Titre abrégé: Front Vet Sci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101666658

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021
Historique:
received: 28 06 2021
accepted: 20 09 2021
entrez: 8 11 2021
pubmed: 9 11 2021
medline: 9 11 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The aim of this study was to test the feasibility and reliability of the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol for welfare assessment of dairy goats when applied to semi-extensive farming conditions. We recruited 13 farms located in the NW Italian Alps where three assessors individually and independently applied a modified version of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for goats integrated with some indicators derived from the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for sheep. The applied protocol consisted of nine individual-level (body condition score, hair coat condition, abscesses, overgrown claws, udder asymmetry, fecal soiling, nasal discharge, ocular discharge, and improper disbudding) and seven group-level (severe lameness, Qualitative Behavior Assessment-QBA, thermal stress, oblivion, Familiar Human Approach Test-FHAT, synchrony at grazing, synchrony at resting) animal-based indicators. On most farms, the level of welfare was good. Many of the considered welfare problems (overgrown claws, fecal soiling, discharges, and thermal stress) were never recorded. However, oblivion, severe lameness, hair coat condition and abscesses were detected on some farms, with percentages ranging from 5 to 35%. The mean percentage of animals with normal body condition was 67.9 ± 5.7. The level of synchronization during resting was on average low (14.3 ± 7.2%). The application of the whole protocol required more than 4 h/farm and 3 min/goat. The inter-observer reliability varied from excellent (udder asymmetry, overgrown claws, discharges, synchrony at resting, use of shelter) to acceptable (abscesses, fecal soiling, and oblivion), but insufficient for hair coat condition, improper disbudding, synchrony at grazing, QBA. Differences in background of the assessors and feasibility constraints (i.e., use of binoculars in unfenced pastures, individual-level assessment conducted during the morning milking in narrow and dark pens, difficulties when using the scan and instantaneous sampling method due to the high number of animals that moved at the same time) can affect the reliability of data collection. Extensive training seems necessary for properly scoring animals when applying the QBA, whereas the FHAT to evaluate the Human-Animal Relationship of goats at pasture seems promising but needs to be validated. Indicators that evaluate the synchrony of activities require to be validated to identify the best moment to perform the observations during the day.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34746279
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.731927
pmc: PMC8566805
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

731927

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 Battini, Renna, Giammarino, Battaglini and Mattiello.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

Front Vet Sci. 2017 Dec 11;4:210
pubmed: 29322048
J Dairy Sci. 2020 Dec;103(12):11820-11832
pubmed: 33222862
Animal. 2017 Feb;11(2):261-273
pubmed: 27364762
Sci Data. 2018 Oct 30;5:180227
pubmed: 30375994
Animals (Basel). 2020 Sep 08;10(9):
pubmed: 32911817
Acta Vet Scand. 2008;50 Suppl 1:S1-12
pubmed: 19049678
Animals (Basel). 2018 Jul 19;8(7):
pubmed: 30029507
Equine Vet J. 2008 Sep;40(6):558-64
pubmed: 18356129
Animals (Basel). 2015 Sep 25;5(4):934-50
pubmed: 26479477
Animals (Basel). 2017 Dec 24;8(1):
pubmed: 29295551
J Dairy Sci. 2007 Mar;90(3):1209-14
pubmed: 17297096
Animals (Basel). 2019 Aug 17;9(8):
pubmed: 31426493
Animals (Basel). 2021 May 18;11(5):
pubmed: 34069942
J Biol Rhythms. 2002 Aug;17(4):284-92
pubmed: 12164245
Vet Rec. 2010 Nov 13;167(20):774-80
pubmed: 21262609
Transl Anim Sci. 2018 Dec 31;3(1):212-224
pubmed: 32704793
Animal. 2018 Sep;12(9):1942-1949
pubmed: 29306346
Animals (Basel). 2021 Feb 13;11(2):
pubmed: 33668569
Animals (Basel). 2020 Apr 02;10(4):
pubmed: 32252331
Aust Vet J. 2008 Jan-Feb;86(1-2):12-7
pubmed: 18271817

Auteurs

Monica Battini (M)

Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences-Production, Landscape, Agroenergy, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Manuela Renna (M)

Department of Veterinary Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Mauro Giammarino (M)

Department of Prevention, ASL TO3, Veterinary Service, Turin, Italy.

Luca Battaglini (L)

Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Silvana Mattiello (S)

Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences-Production, Landscape, Agroenergy, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.

Classifications MeSH