A systematic approach to defining and verifying descriptors used in the Qualitative Behavioural Assessment of sows.

IF 1.4 4区 农林科学 Q2 VETERINARY SCIENCES
Animal Welfare Pub Date : 2024-02-14 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1017/awf.2024.6
Sarah Ibach, Jen-Yun Chou, Monica Battini, Thomas D Parsons
{"title":"A systematic approach to defining and verifying descriptors used in the Qualitative Behavioural Assessment of sows.","authors":"Sarah Ibach, Jen-Yun Chou, Monica Battini, Thomas D Parsons","doi":"10.1017/awf.2024.6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) is a welfare evaluation tool that uses a holistic approach to capturing an animal's emotional state. Lists of QBA descriptors validated to assess pig welfare exist, but their definitions are often not described in peer-reviewed literature and the processes used to develop definitions are lacking. The objective of this study is to detail a systematic approach to creating clear definitions for a pre-existing fixed list of QBA descriptors and test their application. A fixed list of 20 descriptors from the EU Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for pigs was modified, and ten pig experts were recruited to assist with defining these descriptors in a focus group-style discussion. Half of the experts involved in creating descriptor definitions partook in a subsequent step, where the newly developed definitions were tested by implementing QBA on a video library of post-weaned sows selected to capture the breadth of sow behaviour. Experts displayed excellent agreement in identifying a PCA dimension interpreted as the valence of descriptors and good agreement for another reflecting arousal. Inter-observer reliability was also measured for each descriptor. Only two descriptors exhibited less than moderate agreement between experts whereas half of the descriptors evoked substantial agreement or better. These findings support our process to delineate clear definitions for a fixed list of QBA descriptors in pigs. This study is the first of its kind detailing the in-depth process of creating and verifying descriptor definitions for future use in sow welfare assessment.</p>","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"33 ","pages":"e8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10936250/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/awf.2024.6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) is a welfare evaluation tool that uses a holistic approach to capturing an animal's emotional state. Lists of QBA descriptors validated to assess pig welfare exist, but their definitions are often not described in peer-reviewed literature and the processes used to develop definitions are lacking. The objective of this study is to detail a systematic approach to creating clear definitions for a pre-existing fixed list of QBA descriptors and test their application. A fixed list of 20 descriptors from the EU Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for pigs was modified, and ten pig experts were recruited to assist with defining these descriptors in a focus group-style discussion. Half of the experts involved in creating descriptor definitions partook in a subsequent step, where the newly developed definitions were tested by implementing QBA on a video library of post-weaned sows selected to capture the breadth of sow behaviour. Experts displayed excellent agreement in identifying a PCA dimension interpreted as the valence of descriptors and good agreement for another reflecting arousal. Inter-observer reliability was also measured for each descriptor. Only two descriptors exhibited less than moderate agreement between experts whereas half of the descriptors evoked substantial agreement or better. These findings support our process to delineate clear definitions for a fixed list of QBA descriptors in pigs. This study is the first of its kind detailing the in-depth process of creating and verifying descriptor definitions for future use in sow welfare assessment.

定义和验证母猪定性行为评估中所用描述符的系统方法。
定性行为评估(QBA)是一种福利评估工具,它采用整体方法来捕捉动物的情绪状态。定性行为评估描述符清单已被证实可用于评估猪的福利,但同行评议的文献中往往没有对其定义进行描述,也缺乏用于制定定义的过程。本研究的目的是详细介绍一种系统的方法,为预先存在的 QBA 描述因子固定列表创建清晰的定义,并测试其应用情况。我们修改了欧盟猪福利质量® 评估规程中的 20 个描述符的固定列表,并招募了 10 名养猪专家,通过焦点小组式讨论协助定义这些描述符。参与创建描述符定义的专家中有一半参加了随后的步骤,在断奶后母猪视频库中对新开发的定义进行 QBA 测试,以捕捉母猪的各种行为。专家们在确定一个被解释为描述符情感的 PCA 维度时表现出了极好的一致性,在确定另一个反映唤醒的维度时也表现出了良好的一致性。此外,还对每个描述因子的观察者间可靠性进行了测量。专家之间只有两个描述符的一致性低于中等水平,而半数描述符的一致性达到或超过了中等水平。这些发现支持了我们为猪的 QBA 描述因子固定列表划定明确定义的进程。本研究首次详细介绍了创建和验证描述符定义的深入过程,以便将来用于母猪福利评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Animal Welfare
Animal Welfare 农林科学-动物学
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
8.30%
发文量
43
审稿时长
18-36 weeks
期刊介绍: Animal Welfare is an international scientific and technical journal. It publishes the results of peer-reviewed scientific research, technical studies and reviews relating to the welfare of kept animals (eg on farms, in laboratories, zoos and as companions) and of those in the wild whose welfare is compromised by human activities. Papers on related ethical, social, and legal issues and interdisciplinary papers will also be considered for publication. Studies that are derivative or which replicate existing publications will only be considered if they are adequately justified. Papers will only be considered if they bring new knowledge (for research papers), new perspectives (for reviews) or develop new techniques. Papers must have the potential to improve animal welfare, and the way in which they achieve this, or are likely to do so, must be clearly specified in the section on Animal welfare implications.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信