Search

Simple Summary: Genetic improvement in the cattle production industry is a driver of productive, economic and sustainable improvements. Farmers have genetic tools that make it easier for them to make decisions considering their social and productive reality. Although there are new techniques and tools to improve livestock genetics, and despite efforts to promote their use through agricultural extension, there is still a gap between the creation of these tools and their actual use by livestock farmers. This review was conducted to understand how genetic improvement tools in livestock production are being promoted globally. Most studies carried out surveys or interviews with farmers and stakeholders on both social and productive topics. Although social factors are known to affect whether these improvements are adopted or not, the use of social theories to understand this is still in its incipient. More research is needed to understand how to successfully promote the use of these genetic tools in specific productive regions. In the cattle industry, tools for genetic improvement play a crucial role in animal selection. The changing circumstances faced by farmers and the significant part agricultural extension plays in these changes must be considered. Despite progress in genetic selection tools and the push for their adoption through extension services, a disconnect persists between the development of new strategies and tools for genetic improvement and their adoption by livestock farmers. This systematic review is designed to globally investigate the methodology and outcomes of extension research aimed at advancing genetic improvement in beef cattle. Adhering to PRISMA guidelines, a search was conducted across four databases for studies published from January 2012 to June 2023. Twenty-one articles were selected and reviewed. The research design in the articles predominantly employed mixed methods, utilizing both quantitative and qualitative approaches. While social factors are acknowledged as influencers in the adoption process, the application of theories or frameworks from social sciences is still in its early stages. To successfully implement extension activities that promote the use of genetic tools in cattle for a specific production region, more participatory research is required where farmers are actively involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of pain relief during castration and dehorning of calves on commercial beef operations can be limited by constraints associated with the delivery of analgesic agents. As topical anaesthetic (TA) and buccal meloxicam (MEL) are now available in Australia, offering practical analgesic treatments for concurrent castration and dehorning of beef calves, a study was conducted to determine their efficacy in providing pain relief when applied separately or in combination. Weaner calves were randomly allocated to; (1) no castration and dehorning/positive control (CONP); (2) castration and dehorning/negative control (CONN); (3) castration and dehorning with buccal meloxicam (BM); (4) castration and dehorning with topical anaesthetic (TA); and (5) castration and dehorning with buccal meloxicam and topical anaesthetic (BMTA). Weight gain, paddock utilisation, lying activity and individual behaviours following treatment were measured. CONP and BMTA calves had significantly greater weight gain than CONN calves (p < 0.001). CONN calves spent less time lying compared to BMTA calves on all days (p < 0.001). All dehorned and castrated calves spent more time walking (p = 0.024) and less time eating (p < 0.001) compared to CONP calves. There was a trend for CONP calves to spend the most time standing and CONN calves to spend the least time standing (p = 0.059). There were also trends for the frequency of head turns to be lowest in CONP and BMTA calves (p = 0.098) and tail flicks to be highest in CONN and BM calves (p = 0.061). The findings of this study suggest that TA and MEL can potentially improve welfare and production of calves following surgical castration and amputation dehorning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: Sheep predation by wild dogs has serious production and animal welfare implications. By monitoring changes in the behaviour of sheep, on-animal sensors are an option for detecting wild dogs and alerting producers to their presence. This study identified differences in the daily distance travelled of sheep when in the presence and absence of a wild dog and highlights the potential for on-animal sensors to be used as a monitoring and management tool for wild dog detection. In Australia, wild dogs are one of the leading causes of sheep losses. A major problem with managing wild dogs in Australia's rangeland environments is that sheep producers are often unaware of their presence until injuries or deaths are observed. One option for earlier detection of wild dogs is on-animal sensors, such as Global Positioning System (GPS) tracking collars, to detect changes in the behaviour of sheep due to the presence of wild dogs. The current study used spatio-temporal data, derived from GPS tracking collars, deployed on sheep from a single rangeland property to determine if there were differences in the behaviour of sheep when in the presence, or absence, of a wild dog. Results indicated that the presence of a wild dog influenced the daily behaviours of sheep by increasing the daily distance travelled. Differences in sheep diurnal activity were also observed during periods where a wild dog was present or absent on the property. These results highlight the potential for on-animal sensors to be used as a monitoring tool for sheep flocks directly impacted by wild dogs, although further work is needed to determine the applicability of these results to other sheep production regions of Australia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Simple Summary: 'Good animal welfare' has evolved in recent decades to recognise behavioural, physiological and health factors, acknowledging that an animal may have good clinical health and be productive, though their welfare may be poor. The five freedoms and domains of animal welfare provide internationally recognised frameworks against which to evaluate practices to shape evidence-based standards which recognise both the physical and mental health needs of animals to provide a balanced view of an animal's ability to cope in its environment. Whilst there are many techniques to measure animal welfare, the challenge lies with how best to align these with future changes in definitions and expectations, advances in science, legislative requirements and technology improvements. Substantial literature discusses the use of technology for improving animal monitoring, management and productivity on and off farm, though little has been published in relation to using such technologies to support legislative compliance and drive overall improvements in animal welfare. This article discusses the current legislation around animal welfare (with a focus on the Australian red meat sector); the impact of public expectation of welfare standards and production practices; and the current and future opportunity for on-animal sensors to support animal welfare, monitoring, management and compliance. The five freedoms and, more recently, the five domains of animal welfare provide internationally recognised frameworks to evaluate animal welfare practices which recognise both the physical and mental wellbeing needs of animals, providing a balanced view of their ability to cope in their environment. Whilst there are many techniques to measure animal welfare, the challenge lies with how best to align these with future changes in definitions and expectations, advances in science, legislative requirements, and technology improvements. Furthermore, enforcement of current animal welfare legislation in relation to livestock in Australia and the reliance on self-audits for accreditation schemes, challenges our ability to objectively measure animal welfare. On-animal sensors have enormous potential to address animal welfare concerns and assist with legislative compliance, through continuous measurement and monitoring of an animal's behavioural state and location being reflective of their wellbeing. As reliable animal welfare measures evolve and the cost of on-animal sensors reduce, technology adoption will increase as the benefits across the supply chain are realised. Future adoption of on-animal sensors by producers will primarily depend on a value proposition for their business being clear; algorithm development to ensure measures are valid and reliable; increases in producer knowledge, willingness, and trust in data governance; and improvements in data transmission and connectivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]