Search

Respiratory and metabolic diseases in livestock cost the agriculture sector billions each year, with delayed diagnosis a key exacerbating factor. Previous studies have shown the potential for breath analysis to successfully identify incidence of disease in a range of livestock. However, these techniques typically involve animal handling, the use of nasal swabs or fixing a mask to individual animals to obtain a sample of breath. Using a cohort of 26 cattle as an example, we show how the breath of individual animals within a herd can be monitored using a passive sampling system, where no such handling is required. These benefits come at the cost of the desired breath samples unavoidably mixed with the complex cocktail of odours that are present within the cattle shed. Data were analysed using positive matrix factorisation (PMF) to identify and remove non-breath related sources of volatile organic compounds. In total three breath factors were identified (endogenous-, non-endogenous breath and rumen) and seven factors related to other sources within and around the cattle shed (e.g. cattle feed, traffic, urine and faeces). Simulation of a respiratory disease within the herd showed that the abnormal change in breath composition was captured in the residuals of the ten factor PMF solution, highlighting the importance of their inclusion as part of the breath fraction. Increasing the number of PMF factors to 17 saw the identification of a ‘diseased’ factor, which coincided with the visits of the three ‘diseased’ cattle to the breath monitor platform. This work highlights the important role that factor analysis techniques can play in analysing passive breath monitoring data.

The intensification of Scottish salmon farming has been associated with increasing demands for the monitoring and safeguarding of farmed salmon welfare. Continued growth of farm productivity, while avoiding adverse effects on salmon welfare, will require the development of effective welfare assessment tools.This paper reports on a survey of the Scottish salmon farming industry, which was conducted to understand current salmon welfare concerns and priorities for research. As part of a broader aim for further developing tools for on-farm salmon welfare assessment, a total of 61 individuals working in the Scottish salmon farming industry took part. This survey intentionally focused on industry stakeholders to provide insights into current practices and challenges associated with monitoring and assessing salmon welfare. Participants were recruited through authors’ industry contacts, online advertisements, and searches of company websites. In terms of production stages, survey participants believed that the seawater rearing stage is a major area of concern, largely due to thechallenges presented by sea lice. Gill health and environmental challenges, mainly relating to water quality, were two other highly ranked welfare concerns. Methods to monitor salmon welfare during husbandry practices, where disturbances and contact with the salmon is unavoidable (particularly during crowding, grading, andinterventions), were emphasised as a priority. Although these were identified as the major concerns, the survey indicated that there are other significant welfare concerns specific to each production stage that also require consideration.Participants highlighted non-invasive, remote, and animal-based welfare measures as important areas for further development for on-farm welfare assessments. Behavioural measures were identified as having the potential to make a major contribution in this context. This survey presents the first collection of opinions from professionals employed across the Scottish salmon farming industry regarding the current overall state of farmed salmon welfare. This study upholds the importance of using an integrated approach to welfare assessments, and that behavioural measures could play an important role in ensuring these assessments benefit both salmon welfare and farm productivity.

Several animal welfare issues persist in practice despite extensive research which has been linked to the unwillingness of stakeholders to make changes. For example, most farmers do not perceive pig aggression to be a problem that requires action despite the fact that stress and injuries are common, and that several solutions exist. Frequent exposure to animal suffering could affect farmer responses to distressed animals. This study investigated for the first time whether this occurs, using pig aggression as a focus. Using video clips, 90 pig farmers judged the severity of aggression, level of pig exhaustion and the strength of their own emotional response. Their judgments were compared to objective measures of severity (pigs’ skin lesions and blood lactate), and against control groups with similar pig experience (10 pig veterinarians) and without experience (26 agricultural students; 24 animal science students). Famers did not show desensitization to aggression. However, all groups underestimated the outcome of aggression when they did not see the fight occurring as compared to witnessing a fight in progress. We suggest that farmers be provided with evidence of the economic and welfare impact of aggression as indicated by lesions and that they be advised to score lesions on affected animals.

International audience

This study aims to assess the test-retest reliability of buffalo response to humans and the relationship between the behaviour of stockpeople and buffalo. The research was carried out in 27 buffalo farms located in southern Italy. Milk production was recorded only in the 14 farms enrolled in the milk recording scheme. Before assessment informed consent was obtained by stockpeople. Human–animal relationship was assessed through two different tests: behavioural observations of stockperson and animals during milking and avoidance distance at the manger. These tests were repeated within one month to assess test–retest reliability. Stockpeople attitude was evaluated using a questionnaire divided into four sections (general beliefs about buffaloes, general beliefs about working with buffaloes, behavioural intentions with respect to interacting with buffaloes and job satisfaction) including 21 statements. A high degree of test–retest reliability was observed for all the variables concerning the behaviour of stockpeople and animals. The values of Spearman rank correlation coefficient (rs) ranged from 0.578 (P