Using Expert Elicitation to Abridge the Welfare Quality® Protocol for Monitoring the Most Adverse Dairy Cattle Welfare Impairments.

The Welfare Quality® consortium has developed and proposed standard protocols for monitoring farm animal welfare. The uptake of the dairy cattle protocol has been below expectation, however, and it has been criticized for the variable quality of the welfare measures and for a limited number of measures having a disproportionally large effect on the integrated welfare categorization. Aiming for a wide uptake by the milk industry, we revised and simplified the Welfare Quality® protocol into a user-friendly tool for cost- and time-efficient on-farm monitoring of dairy cattle welfare with a minimal number of key animal-based measures that are aggregated into a continuous (and thus discriminative) welfare index (WI). The inevitable subjective decisions were based upon expert opinion, as considerable expertise about cattle welfare issues and about the interpretation, importance, and validity of the welfare measures was deemed essential. The WI is calculated as the sum of the severity score (i.e., how severely a welfare problem affects cow welfare) multiplied with the herd prevalence for each measure. The selection of measures (lameness, leanness, mortality, hairless patches, lesions/swellings, somatic cell count) and their severity scores were based on expert surveys (14-17 trained users of the Welfare Quality® cattle protocol). The prevalence of these welfare measures was assessed in 491 European herds. Experts allocated a welfare score (from 0 to 100) to 12 focus herds for which the prevalence of each welfare measure was benchmarked against all 491 herds. Quadratic models indicated a high correspondence between these subjective scores and the WI (R 2 = 0.91). The WI allows both numerical (0-100) as a qualitative ("not classified" to "excellent") evaluation of welfare. Although it is sensitive to those welfare issues that most adversely affect cattle welfare (as identified by EFSA), the WI should be accompanied with a disclaimer that lists adverse or favorable effects that cannot be detected adequately by the current selection of measures.

Refinement of international recommendations for cubicles, based on the identification of associations between cubicle characteristics and dairy cow welfare measures.

Maladjusted cubicles for dairy cattle may cause increased skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. The International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering has produced several recommendations for cubicle design, but a previous study showed that not all of them seem efficient. Here, we aim to refine and complete these recommendations. We collected data on 76 dairy farms (2,404 cows). We modeled the association between combinations of cubicle properties (e.g., type of bedding litter) and dimensions (e.g., cubicle width) relative to cow size, and prevalence of cow skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. We used weighted multivariable logistic regression models to predict the presence of skin alteration on the carpus; the neck, shoulder, and back; the flank, side, and udder; and the tarsus or hindquarters. We also evaluated the presence of lameness as well as the dirtiness of the lower hind legs including hocks; the hindquarters, upper hind legs, and flank; the cow rear including tail; and the udder. The risk factors highlighted led us to recommend (1) position cubicles in a way that leaves more than 1 m of clearance from any obstacle in front of the cubicle; (2) if there is an obstacle on the lateral plane (i.e., where the cubicle partition is) in front ahead of the cow, put the obstacle in front of the fore knees; (3) if there is an obstacle in front of the cow on the median plane (e.g., neck or front rail), the position the obstacle between 1.25 and 1.5 of the cow length from the curb and between 1.0 and 1.25 of its height; (4) use curb height between 0.11 and 0.15 of cow height with no sharp edges on the curb; (5) use round or at least has no sharp edges brisket board; (6) use a stone-free soil instead of concrete or use a mattress thicker than 1 cm, with microrelief, and a soft fixing area at the curb, (7) litter with straw (rather than nothing or sawdust) and keep it dry. This risk factor analysis should be followed by experiments in controlled environments to further validate these conclusions and used to update the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering recommendations.

Do International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (CIGR) dimension recommendations for loose housing of cows improve animal welfare?

Design of cubicles and self-locking barriers can affect cow skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. We investigated whether the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering (CIGR, Gainesville, FL)-recommended cattle housing design and dimensions actually improve cow welfare. We recorded individual cow body dimensions and assessed skin alterations, dirtiness, and lameness on 3,841 cows from 131 loose housing dairy farms (76 farms with cubicles and 55 straw-yard systems). We recorded the dimensions of cubicles (e.g., width, length, and so on) and of the self-locking barrier (e.g., top rail height and so on) for each farm. We then compared whether these dimensions would match with the individual cow body dimensions and whether compliance was associated with the occurrence of skin alterations, lameness, and dirtiness. Most cows (69.2%) had at least one skin alteration, on the tarsus (41.2%); neck, shoulder, or back (28.2%); hindquarters (22.0%); carpus (21.2%); and flank, side, or udder (11.6%). Lameness prevalence reached 17.9%. Most cows (83.1%) were scored dirty in at least one body region, mainly on the lower hind legs including hocks (81.4%), hindquarters (41.8%), and udder (21.0%). Cubicle recommendations were mostly met for cubicle resting length (75.9% of cubicles) and neck rail distance (NRD, 60.7%) but less so for overall cubicle length (CL, 38.8%), cubicle width (CW, 30.9%), neck rail height (NRH, 22.5%), head space (HS, 15.8%), partition zone for controlling lying position (ii zone, 15.7%), head and lunging space (HLS, 10.6%), partition head zone (i zone, 9.4%), and partition zone for pelvis freedom (iii zone, 6.0%). Compliance with design recommendations was associated with fewer skin alterations on neck (recommendation met for CW, CL, HS, and NRD and i zone), hindquarters (CW, CL, NRD), tarsus (CW, i and ii zones), and carpus (CW, HS, i and ii zones); less lameness (CW, NRH, i zone); and less dirtiness on the hindquarters (CW, HLS, NRD), lower hind legs (iii zone), and udder (CW, CL, HLS, NRD). Compliance with recommended i zone and ii zone design was associated with less injury and lameness but more dirtiness, whereas the opposite was true for the iii zone. Self-locking barrier recommendations were mostly met for bottom rail height (68.2%), separation wall width (SWW, 68.3%), and top rail height (TRH, 56.9%) and less often met for separation wall height (36.3%) and height difference between feeding floor and walking alley (26.5%). Risk for skin alterations on carpus and neck only decreased when SWW and TRH met recommendations. In conclusion, compliance with CIGR recommendations for some cubicle dimensions and neck rail position was associated with lower risk for cow welfare. However, the CIGR recommendations on cubicle partitions and self-locking barriers still leave welfare at risk and so need to be refined through further research with close observation of cow lying and feeding behavior.

A prospective exploration of farm, farmer, and animal characteristics in human-animal relationships: An epidemiological survey.

Human-animal relationships are essential for dairy farming. They affect work comfort and efficiency, as well as milk production. A poor human-animal relationship can result in stress and accidents to both animals and caretakers and needs to be improved. However, many studies have demonstrated the multifactoriality of these relationships. We aimed at assessing the relative importance of the various factors expected to be associated with poor human-animal relationships. On 118 dairy farms, we applied a standardized avoidance distance test to cows at the feeding rack. The sample of farms covered a wide range of situations: lowland versus highland, small versus medium size farms, cubicles versus deep-bedded systems, milking parlor versus automatic milking systems, and Holstein versus Montbéliarde breeds. We used Poisson regression to analyze the links between the number of cows that accepted being touched, and farm characteristics, animals, management, and farmers' attitudes. A multivariate analysis yielded a final model that explained 32.7% of the variability between farms. Calving conditions ("Main calving location" and "Cleaning or adding litter after calving") accounted for a significant part of the variability observed (respectively 25.8 and 13.6% of variability explained by the model, SSB). Fewer cows accepted being touched on farms where the main calving location was in the barn, and where farmers cleaned or added litter after calving. The proportion of cows that accepted being touched increased with the proportion of lean cows in the herd (18.8%), with worker/cow ratio on the farm (11.7%), when farmers considered "health" or "human-cow relationships" as most important issues for farm success (10.4%), and with farmers' years of experience (10.8%). Farmers with more negative behavioral attitudes toward cows had a lower proportion of cows that accepted being touched (8.9%). In conclusion, the human-animal relationship was not found to be associated with farm characteristics (e.g., housing or milking system) but varied with farmers' attitudes and management. We confirm that cows' fear of people is linked to negative attitudes displayed by caretakers toward cows, and is reduced in farms where several caretakers are present. Our study also suggests further exploring the key role of factors linked to calving conditions, as cows are more likely to be afraid of people when disturbed at calving.

Does milk yield reflect the level of welfare in dairy herds?

Under the assumption that milk yield may be reduced in herds with impaired welfare, the present study aimed at investigating whether milk yield could be used as a reliable indicator of welfare. In 125 commercial French dairy herds, the association between the welfare of the herd (evaluated using the Welfare Quality assessment protocol) and cow milk yield was investigated using linear mixed models. Positive associations were identified between milk yield and low aggressions between cows and good emotional state of the herd but there was a negative association with good health assessed through the occurrence of diseases and injuries. These opposite associations resulted in no association with the overall welfare of the herd. Milk yield should not therefore be used as an indicator of overall welfare.

Visual discrimination of species in dogs (Canis familiaris).

In most social interactions, an animal has to determine whether the other animal belongs to its own species. This perception may be visual and may involve several cognitive processes such as discrimination and categorization. Perceptual categorization is likely to be involved in species characterized by a great phenotypic diversity. As a consequence of intensive artificial selection, domestic dogs, Canis familiaris, present the largest phenotypic diversity among domestic mammals. The goal of our study was to determine whether dogs can discriminate any type of dog from other species and can group all dogs whatever their phenotypes within the same category. Nine pet dogs were successfully trained through instrumental conditioning using a clicker and food rewards to choose a rewarded image, S+, out of two images displayed on computer screens. The generalization step consisted in the presentation of a large sample of paired images of heads of dogs from different breeds and cross-breeds with those of other mammal species, included humans. A reversal phase followed the generalization step. Each of the nine subjects was able to group all the images of dogs within the same category. Thus, the dogs have the capacity of species discrimination despite their great phenotypic variability, based only on visual images of heads.

The motivations and practice-area interests of first-year French veterinary students (2005-2008).

Concerns about new trends in the veterinary profession in several industrialized countries have received significant attention recently. We conducted an online survey among first-year veterinary students enrolled between 2005 and 2008 in France's four National Veterinary Schools (Ecoles Nationales Vétérinaires [ENV]) to inquire into what determined future graduates' practice-area interests and how they built a concept of their future work. A total of 1,080 students-or 70% of first-year students-responded to the survey. These students were predominantly of middle and higher social classes and most of them lived in urban areas. About 96% of the respondents had made the ENV their first choice when taking the entrance examination. In total, 39.7% declared "vocation" as the leading factor influencing their career choice. Together, the three leading practice types (wild animals, pets, and mixed) contemplated by students after graduating amount to 64.7% of the points awarded. Practice types that are not directly related to animal health were disregarded in this analysis. The results convey both how early and how firmly the choice of the veterinary career is made. They highlight the preponderance of the image of the veterinarian as an "animal doctor," the gap between the respective proportions of practice areas in the current employment pattern of veterinarians, and the aspirations of students upon admission to the ENV. A longitudinal study after one year is needed to test whether or not these career choices change during the five years of the ENV program under the influence of teaching and extramural studies.