Search

Objective and issue-neutral qualitative assessments of livestock behavior could provide a powerful assessment of welfare, augmenting quantitative measures such as autonomic and endocrine changes, which are often difficult to assess under many commercial livestock conditions. We set out to validate the use of qualitative behavioral assessment (QBA) in sheep using controlled experimental conditions (transport as a challenge) and comparing assessments against physiological variables. The behavioral expression of 14 Merino wethers, which had never experienced land transport, were assessed during their first road event (naïve to transport), and then again on their seventh event, 8 d later (habituated to transport). Blood samples were collected immediately before loading and after unloading, and heart rate and core body temperature were measured continuously throughout each event. Continuous video footage recorded during each event was used to provide clips of individual animals that were shown to observers for QBA. There was significant consensus (P < 0.001) amongst 63 observers in terms of their assessment of the behavioral expression of the sheep. Transport-naïve sheep were assessed as being more 'alert', 'anxious', and 'aware', whereas transport-habituated sheep were more 'comfortable', 'tired', and 'confident' (P = 0.015). Heart rate and heart rate variability, core body temperature and a stress leukogram were greater (P < 0.05) in sheep during the first (naïve) event compared with the habituated event, and were significantly correlated with the QBA scores (P < 0.05). In conclusion, QBA is a valid, practical and informative measure of behavioral responses to transport.

This study investigates the interobserver and intraobserver reliability of qualitative behavior assessments (QBA) of individual pigs by 3 observer groups selected for their diverging backgrounds, experience, and views of pigs. Qualitative behavior assessment is a "whole animal" assessment approach that characterizes the demeanor of an animal as an expressive body language, using descriptors such as relaxed, anxious, or content. This paper addresses the concern that use of such descriptors in animal science may be prone to distortion by observer-related bias. Using a free-choice profiling methodology, 12 pig farmers, 10 large animal veterinarians, and 10 animal protectionists were instructed to describe and score the behavioral expressions of 10 individual pigs (sus scrofa) in 2 repeat sets of 10 video clips, showing these pigs in interaction with a human female. They were also asked to fill in a questionnaire gauging their experiences with and views on pigs. Pig scores were analyzed with generalized procrustes analysis and effect of treatment on these scores with ANOVA. Questionnaire scores were analyzed with a χ(2) test or ANOVA. Observers achieved consensus both within and among observer groups (P < 0.001), identifying 2 main dimensions of pig expression (dim1: playful/confident-cautious/timid; dim2: aggressive/nervous-relaxed/bored), on which pig scores for different observer groups were highly correlated (pearson r > 0.90). The 3 groups also repeated their assessments of individual pigs with high precision (r > 0.85). Animal protectionists used a wider quantitative range in scoring individual pigs on dimension 2 than the other groups (P < 0.001); however, this difference did not distort the strong overall consistency of characterizations by observers of individual pigs. Questionnaire results indicated observer groups to differ in various ways, such as daily and lifetime contact with pigs (P < 0.001), some aspects of affection and empathy for pigs (P < 0.05), and confidence in the validity of personal QBA descriptors (P < 0.02). The main finding of this study is that despite such differences in background and outlook, the 3 observer groups showed high interobserver and intraobserver reliability in their characterizations of pig body language. This supports the empirical nature of QBA in context of the wider anthropomorphism debate.