Search

This position paper describes a common stand on methodology of human attitudes and behaviour that is suitable to use in studies regarding cow-calf contact (CCC) in dairy production, in order to create a common knowledge base and foundation for future recommendations of CCC systems. We describe how different quantitative and qualitative methods can be used to study human attitudes to CCC as well as farmer or consumer behaviour. We aim to contribute to a better understanding of the available methods, and hope that this paper can be used as a guideline for future studies in this area.

Due to increasing public concern regarding separation of the dairy cow and calf within the first days after birth, alternative systems, where cows and calves stay in contact for an extended period, are receiving increasing interest from a broad array of researchers and other stakeholders. With more research in the area, there is a risk of inconsistencies emerging in the use of terminology. To create a better consensus in further discussions, the aim of this Research Reflection is to provide definitions and propose a common terminology for cow-calf contact in dairy production. We also suggest definitions for various systems allowing cow-calf contact and describe the distinct phases of cow-calf contact systems.

This study aimed to describe the behaviour of Podolian breed, a semiwild cattle breed kept in a natural environment (as either a small group of young bulls or cows within a family herd), and the interaction of these animals with the environment in terms of ingestion from natural pastures. Diurnal grazing behavioural pattern was monitored through continuous focal animal recording method. The activity budget of free-ranging animals was characterized by high locomotor and feeding activities. They exhibited a high degree of adaptability to the local phytocoenosis with high levels of ferns' and tree foliage intakes performed by cows and the selection of a diet more nutritious than pasture performed by young bulls. These results along with the low levels of agonistic interactions recorded in the two experiments suggest that extensive systems based on grazing allow social stability and provide a natural environment for the expression of cattle species-specific behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Fighting bulls that participate in bullfighting face energy and metabolic demands due to the high intensity and duration of the exercise performed. Under these conditions, specific corporal mechanisms, such as the acid–base balance, are affected, causing metabolic acidosis. However, fighting bulls also undergo muscular injuries, physiological changes, and high enzyme concentrations that reflect the stress to which they are subjected, and in some bulls, bullfights can trigger electrolytic imbalances that include hypercalcaemia, hypermagnesaemia, and hyperphosphataemia, exacerbated by muscular necrosis and myoglobinuria. During bullfights, bulls undergo physiometabolic responses such as glycolysis, anaerobic reactions, cellular oedema, splenic contraction, and hypovolemic shock. The objective of this review article is to present the current knowledge on the factors that cause stress in fighting bulls during bullfights, including their dying process, by discussing the neurobiology and their physiological responses. The literature shows that biochemical imbalances occur during bullfights, including hypercalcaemia, hypermagnesaemia, hyperphosphataemia, hyperlactataemia, and hyperglycaemia, associated with increased endogenous cortisol and catecholamine levels. Creatine kinase, citrate synthase, and lactate dehydrogenase levels also increase, coupled with decreases in pH, blood bicarbonate levels, excess base, partial oxygen pressure, and oxygen saturation. The intense exercise also causes a marked decrease of glycogen in type I and II muscle fibres that can produce myoglobinuria and muscular necrosis. Other observations suggest the presence of osteochondrosis. The existing information allows us to conclude that during bullfights, bulls face energy and metabolic demands due to the high intensity and duration of the exercise performed, together with muscular injuries, physiological changes, and high enzyme concentrations. In addition, the final stage of the bullfight causes a slow dying process for an animal that is sentient and conscious of its surroundings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Although mechanisation has markedly reduced animal labour demand in agriculture, draught animals are still used in small production units located on terrains that do not favour agriculture mechanisation. Especially in Africa, Latin America, and Asia, they represent one of the main sources of sustenance for thousands of families who utilise animal labour in numerous agricultural tasks, such as ploughing and harvesting, as well as means of transport and hauling. Depending on the geographic area, the species involved are equids (horses, donkeys, and mules) and bovids (buffaloes and cattle). Draught animals proved to be sustainable in terms of global warming and the use of non-renewable energy as compared with agricultural machinery. However, critical points are the quality of human–animal interaction, due to the close contact between animals and humans while working, and the welfare of draught animals when transported and slaughtered, due to the high prevalence of injuries they suffer when subjected to these practices. Therefore, their use should be promoted in rural marginal areas where only low investments are usually feasible, and the energy of the animals can be obtained at a low cost by feeding them harvest residues and by-products. This study discusses scientific findings on the use of draught animals such as equids (i.e., horses, mules, and donkeys) and bovids (i.e., cattle and water buffaloes) in rural labours. Relevant peer-reviewed literature published between 1980 and 2021 was retrieved from CAB Abstracts, PubMed, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Scopus databases. Although animals were used to produce draught power since their domestication and are still being used for this purpose, mechanisation has markedly reduced animal labour demand in agriculture. However, the process was uneven across continents according to economic constraints, and draught animals are currently concentrated in small production units located on terrains that do not favour agriculture mechanisation in Africa, Latin America, and Asia. Generally, equids can work at rates similar to those of bovids or faster but can sustain the work for shorter periods of time. In addition, buffaloes possess tough hooves and resistance to disease that make them suitable for working in wetlands and clay soils. Draught animals allow a marked reduction of both GHG emissions and non-renewable energy consumption as compared with agricultural machinery. In addition, they may allow obtaining profits from otherwise non-usable lands. Therefore, their use should be promoted in rural areas where low investments are usually the only ones feasible, and the energy of the animals can be obtained at a low cost by feeding them harvest residues and by-products. However, more attention should be paid to the quality of human–animal interactions—due to the close contact between animals and humans while working—and to the welfare of draught animals when transported and slaughtered—due to the high prevalence of injuries they suffer when subjected to these practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: We pose based on a fundamental science examination that events that occur around the time of slaughter have the potential to intensify the pain response, through a process called sensitisation, or an exaggerated response to painful stimuli. Health conditions which result in inflammation, injuries arising from transport and handling and exaggerated fear responses may all be present at the slaughterhouse. Whilst there is limited evidence of a direct effect of these on the processes of sensitisation in animals at slaughter, by analogy with the human neurobiology literature the connection seems plausible. In this review we outline the biology of such a response, and the rationale for suggestion of a possible linkage between events at slaughter and a heightened animal pain response. We pose, based on a neurobiological examination, that events that occur around the time of slaughter have the potential to intensify the pain response, through the processes of sensitisation and enhanced transmission. Sensitisation, or an enhanced response to painful stimuli, is a well-discussed phenomenon in the human medical literature, which can arise from previous injury to an area, inflammatory reactions, or previous overstimulation of the stress axes. A number of events that occur prior to arrival at, or in the slaughterhouse, may lead to presence of these factors. This includes previous on-farm pathology, injuries arising from transport and handling and lack of habituation to humans. Whilst there is limited evidence of a direct effect of these on the processes of sensitisation in animals at slaughter, by analogy with the human neurobiology literature the connection seems plausible. In this review a neurobiological approach is taken to discuss this hypothesis in the light of basic science, and extrapolations from existing literature on the slaughter of ruminants. To confirm the postulated link between events at slaughter, and processes of hypersensitisation, further dedicated study is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: The concern for better farm animal welfare has been greatly increasing among scientists, veterinarians, farmers, consumers, and the general public over many years. As a consequence, several indicators have been developed to assess animal welfare, and several specific protocols have been proposed for welfare evaluation. Most of the indicators developed so far focus on the negative aspects of animal welfare (e.g., lameness, lesions, diseases, presence of abnormal behaviours, high levels of stress hormones, and many more). However, the lack of negative welfare conditions does not necessarily mean that animals are in good welfare and have a good quality of life. To guarantee high welfare standards, animals should experience positive conditions that allow them to live a life that is really worth living. We reviewed the existing indicators of positive welfare for farmed ruminants and identified some gaps that still require work, especially in the domains of Nutrition and Health, and the need for further refinement of some of the existing indicators. Until now, most research has focused on the development of indicators of negative welfare, and relatively few studies provide information on valid, reliable, and feasible indicators addressing positive aspects of animal welfare. However, a lack of suffering does not guarantee that animals are experiencing a positive welfare state. The aim of the present review is to identify promising valid and reliable animal-based indicators for the assessment of positive welfare that might be included in welfare assessment protocols for ruminants, and to discuss them in the light of the five domains model, highlighting possible gaps to be filled by future research. Based on the existing literature in the main databases, each indicator was evaluated in terms of its validity, reliability, and on-farm feasibility. Some valid indicators were identified, but a lot of the validity evidence is based on their absence when a negative situation is present; furthermore, only a few indicators are available in the domains of Nutrition and Health. Reliability has been seldom addressed. On-farm feasibility could be increased by developing specific sampling strategies and/or relying on the use of video- or automatic-recording devices. In conclusion, several indicators are potentially available (e.g., synchronisation of lying and feeding, coat or fleece condition, qualitative behaviour assessment), but further research is required. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]