Search

Animal welfare in pig production is frequently a topic of debate and is sensitive in nature. This debate is partly due to differences in values, forms, convictions, interests and knowledge among the stakeholders that constitute differences among their frames of reference with respect to pigs and their welfare. Differences in frames of reference by stakeholder groups are studied widely, but not specifically with respect to animal behaviour or welfare. We explored this phenomenon using a qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA). Participating stakeholders were classified into two expert groups consisting of pig farmers (N = 11) and animal scientists (N = 18) and a lay-group consisting of urban citizens (N = 15). The stakeholders were asked to observe the behaviour of a specific pig in each of the nine videos and to assign a score for each video using 21 predefined terms describing the mood, such as 'happy' or 'irritated'. They were asked to complete two additional questionnaires to obtain information on their frames of reference. Results from the QBA showed that the pig farmers observed the behaviour of pigs more positively than the urban citizens and the animal scientists. This was evident from the consistently higher scores on the positive terms to assess pig behaviour. The questionnaires revealed that the farmers had a different frames of reference regarding pigs and different understanding of welfare, which might explain the differences in assessment. In a follow-up stakeholder workshop, which focussed on differences in observation, QBA showed to be an effective tool to stimulate mutual learning among stakeholders, which is necessary to find shared solutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an overview of the Poisonous Plant Research Laboratory (PPRL), about the unique services and activities of the PPRL and the potential assistance that they can provide to plant poisoning incidences. The PPRL is a federal research laboratory. It is part of the Agricultural Research Service, the in-house research arm of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The mission of the PPRL is to identify toxic plants and their toxic compounds, determine how the plants poison animals, and develop diagnostic and prognostic procedures for poisoned animals. Furthermore, the PPRL's mission is to identify the conditions under which poisoning occurs and develop management strategies and treatments to reduce losses. Information obtained through research efforts at the PPRL is mostly used by the livestock industry, natural resource managers, veterinarians, chemists, plant and animal scientists, extension personnel, and other state and federal agencies. PPRL currently has 9 scientists and 17 support staff, representing various disciplines consisting of toxicology, reproductive toxicology, veterinary medicine, chemistry, animal science, range science, and plant physiology. This team of scientists provides an interdisciplinary approach to applied and basic research to develop solutions to plant intoxications. While the mission of the PPRL primarily impacts the livestock industry, spinoff benefits such as development of animal models, isolation and characterization of novel compounds, elucidation of biological and molecular mechanisms of action, national and international collaborations, and outreach efforts are significant to biomedical researchers. The staff at the PPRL has extensive knowledge regarding a number of poisonous plants. Although the focus of their knowledge is on plants that affect livestock, oftentimes, these plants are also poisonous to humans, and thus, similar principles could apply for cases of human poisonings. Consequently, the information provided herein could be of benefit to healthcare providers for human cases as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most traits of interest to medical, agricultural and animal scientists show continuous variation and complex mode of inheritance. DNA-based markers are being deployed to analyse such complex traits, that are known as quantitative trait loci (QTL). In conventional QTL analysis, F, backcross populations, recombinant inbred lines, backcross inbred lines and double haploids from biparental crosses are commonly used. Introgression lines and near isogenic lines are also being used for QTL analysis. However, such populations have major limitations like predominantly relying on the recombination events taking place in the F generation and mapping of only the allelic pairs present in the two parents. The second generation mapping resources like association mapping, nested association mapping and multiparent intercross populations potentially address the major limitations of available mapping resources. The potential of multiparent intercross populations in gene mapping has been discussed here. In such populations both linkage and association analysis can be conductted without encountering the limitations of structured populations. In such populations, larger genetic variation in the germplasm is accessed and various allelic and cytoplasmic interactions are assessed. For all practical purposes, across crop species, use of eight founders and a fixed population of 1000 individuals are most appropriate. Limitations with multiparent intercross populations are that they require longer time and more resource to be generated and they are likely to show extensive segregation for developmental traits, limiting their use in the analysis of complex traits. However, multiparent intercross population resources are likely to bring a paradigm shift towards QTL analysis in plant species. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The authors focus on the need of investments in agricultural innovation in order to boost yields and supply food in a sustainable way. Topics discussed include the need to engage farmers in agricultural research and development (R&D), recruitment of farmers to develop crops by the European Union (EU) under a breeding programme and adaptation of the farmer field school approach by animal scientists in Denmark. Also mentioned is the launch of the European Innovation Partnership by the EU.

The article reports on several views from scientists on the issues concerning animal research. One of the problems facing animal researchers are the violent protests from animal activists that favor reduction of animal research. On the other hand, researchers expressed the significance of animal research in the field of medicine. Communication between the community and animal scientists is an important factor in addressing the problems and bring differing opinions together.

The author reflects on various incidents in Germany which showed a campaign of intimidation by animal-rights extremists. It highlights one incident wherein activists distributed flyers illustrating a local researcher as animal killer and torturer. It mentions that the Basel Declaration in Switzerland will help regulate such cases and it will offer opportunity to increase animal experiments worldwide.

The article reports on the problem faced by researchers in conducting animal experimentations and studies. Primate research has been the cause of arguments between animal-rights activists and researchers. Researchers are experiencing violent protests from animal campaigners with the aim of protecting the animal's welfare used in various research specially in the field of medical research. However, actions are being carried out by researchers to gain support in the use of animals in research.

Information about the topics discussed at a meeting in Basel, Switzerland on November 29, 2010 is presented. Topics include the enforcement of a more open animal research in scientific community and the involvement of scientists in public discussions. The meeting was attended by leading scientists in Germany and Switzerland including Stefan Treue, director of the German Primate Center in Göttingen, and Michael Hengartner, science dean at the University of Zurich.

The article reports on the challenges and threats faced by researchers and scientists in conducting animal research. Animal experimentation both caters advantages and disadvantages from among animal researchers. The protests of animal activists to end the use of animals in research have been the long time threat faced by researchers. On the other hand, animal research supporters presented the significance and benefits of the experiment.

The article presents an interview with Sarah Wolfensohn, head of veterinary services at the University of Oxford in Great Britain. Wolfensohn stated that monitoring the health of primates used in experimental research constitutes the primary role performed by veterinarians. It is of great importance for animal researchers to consider improvements in the life of laboratory primates. However, veterinary surgeons are facing the pressures of balancing both anti-vivisectionists and researchers.