ABSTRACTS

The potential of understory production systems to improve laying hen welfare

The welfare of laying hens in cage systems is of increasing concern. Represented by the European Union's 'End the Cage Age' initiative, more and more countries have advocated cage-free farming. China, an important country for poultry farming and consumption in the world, is highly dependent on cage systems and lacks confidence in alternative (e.g., free-range) systems. In this context, using China's abundant woodland resources (including natural forests, plantations, and commercial forests) to facilitate the management of laying hens in a free-range environment may provide highly promising welfare improvement programs. On the basis of the Five Freedoms, we assess the welfare status of understory laying hen management systems with reference to the behavioural needs and preferences of laying hens and the EU standards for free-range and organic production (highest animal welfare standards in the world). The results show that the considered systems meet or even exceed these standards, in terms of key indicators such as outdoor and indoor stocking density, outdoor activity time, and food and drug use. Specifically, the systems provide sufficient organic food for laying hens without using antibiotics. They allow laying hens to avoid beak trimming, as well as to express nesting, foraging, perching, reproductive, dustbathing, and other priority behaviours. The presence of roosters and higher use of woodland space allow the laying hens to achieve better feather and bone conditions, thus reducing stress and fear damage. Notably, the predation problem is not yet considered significant. Second, there is evidence that understory laying hen systems are profitable and have been welcomed and supported by farmers and governments in the southwest, south, and north of China. However, whether it can be scaled up is uncertain, and further research is needed. In addition, laying hens in this management system face various risks, such as foot injury, parasitism, and high dependence on consumer markets, which must be considered. Overall, agro-forestry, or accurately, understory poultry raising, provides opportunities and possibilities for free-range laying hens and welfare improvement in China and other countries. Shaocong Yan1,Chenyujing Yang1,Lei Zhu1,Yongji Xue1 Animals (Basel).2022 Sep 5;12(17): 2305.doi: 10.3390/ani12172305. 1School of Economics and Management, Beijing Forestry University, Beijing 100083, China.

Free PMC article

Sports ball projectile ocular trauma in dogs

Objective: To describe the clinical features, management, and outcome of dogs presenting with sports ball projectile ocular injuries. Animals studied:Eighteen dogs. Procedures: Aretrospective study reviewing cases of ocular injury due to a sports ball projectile that presented to the Cornell University ophthalmology service between 2004 and 2021. Dog age, type of sports ball, initial ocular lesions, eye affected, clinical management, and visual outcome wererecorded. Results: Sports ball projectile ocular injuries were identified in 18 eyes of 18 dogs. The median age of the dogs was 1.0 years old, ranging from 0.3- to 9-years- old. Nine dogs were male, and 9 were female. Ocular injuries were caused by small, dense balls (e.g., golf balls, baseballs) in 11 dogs; small, light balls (e.g., tennis balls, toy balls) in 5 dogs; and large, soft balls (e.g., soccer ball, football) in 2 dogs. Closed-globe injuries (12 of 18 eyes) presented with traumatic uveitis (91 per cent), hyphema (45 per cent), and subconjunctival haemorrhage (18 per cent). All 12 closed-globe injury cases were medically managed, eight dogs remained visual. Open-globe injuries (6 of 18 dogs) presented with three corneal lacerations and three scleral ruptures. Five open-globe injuries required enucleation, and one was medically managed and maintained vision. Conclusion: Sports ball projectile ocular injuries in dogs can result in substantial ocular morbidity and in loss of vision. Small, dense balls were associated with injuries that carried the most guarded prognosis and required more aggressive management. Small and large lighter projectiles wereassociated with less serious ocular injuries and visual outcomes. Remington X Chan1,Eric C Ledbetter1 Vet Ophthalmol.2022 Sep;25(5): 338-342.doi: 10.1111/vop.12987. 1Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.

Dairy vs beef production - expert views on welfare of cattle in common food production systems

Consumers' views and concerns about the welfare of farm animals may play an important role in their decision to consume dairy, meat and/or plants as their primary protein source. As animals are killed prematurely in both dairy and beef industries, itis important to quantify and compare welfare compromises in these two sectors before the point of death. Seventy world-leading bovine welfare experts based in 23 countries were asked to evaluate the likelihood of a bovine to experience 12 states of potential welfare concern, inspired by the Welfare Quality protocol. The evaluation focused on the most common beef and dairy production systems in the experts' country and was carried out separately for dairy/beef calves raised for red meat, dairy/beef calves raised for veal, dairy/beef calves raised as a replacement, and for dairy/beef cows. The results show experts rated the overall likelihood of a negative welfare state (i.e. welfare risk) to be higher in animals from dairy herds than from beef herds, for all animal categories, regardless of whether they were used to produce milk, red meat or veal. These findings suggest that consuming food products derived from common dairy production systems (dairy or meat) may be more harmful to the welfare of animals than consuming products derived from common beef production systems (i.e. from animals solely raised for their meat). Raising awareness about the linkage between dairy and meat production, and the toll of milk production on the welfare state of animals in the dairy industry, may encourage a more sustainable and responsible food consumption. Roi Mandel1,Marc B M Bracke2,Christine J Nicol3 , John A Webster4,Lorenz Gygax5 Animal.2022 Sep;16(9): 100622.doi: 10.1016/j. animal.2022.100622. 1Section of Animal Welfare and Disease Control, Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark; Behavioural Ecology Group, Section for Ecology & Evolution, Department of Biology, University of Copenhagen, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark. 2Wageningen Livestock Research, Wageningen University and Research, 6708 WD Wageningen, The Netherlands. 3Royal Veterinary College, AL9 7TA Hatfield, United Kingdom. 4Professor Emeritus at the University of Bristol and Former Head of the Bristol Vet School, BS40 5DU Langford, United Kingdom. 5Animal Husbandry & Ethology, Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute of Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Humboldt-University of Berlin, 10099 Berlin. Germany.

Free article

Introducing a puppy to existing household cat(s): mixed method analysis

Although cats and dogs can live amicably,inter-species conflict can result in poor welfare. Species introduction can impact the development of the cat-dog relationship. This study aimed to identify factors associated with owner reported 'only desirable' puppy behaviour (defined as the puppy being uninterested, ignored the cat and/or interacted in a calm way) following introduction to existing household cats, and to explore perceptions of the emerging cat-dog relationship. Owner-reported data collected as partof a longitudinal study of canine health and behaviour were used. Of 4678 puppies, 26.7 per cent lived with at least one cat. Of the 1211 puppies who had been introduced to the household cat at the time of survey completion, playing (58.9 per cent), being overexuberant or over-excited (56.6 per cent), and chasing (48.6 per cent) were the most common behaviours displayed towards cats. 'Only desirable' behaviours were shown by 7.3 per cent of puppies. Multivariable logistic regression showed early (puppies aged <12 weeks), gradual introductions and living in a multi-dog household increased the odds of 'only desirable' behaviours. Qualitative analysis revealed two styles of introductions-owner-led and pet-led. Owners who led introductions anticipated amicable relationships To page 30