A. Ruet, C. Arnould, J. Lemarchand, C. Parias, N. Mach, M. Moisan, A. Foury, C. Briant, L. Lansade
{"title":"马福利:使用AWIN协议,扫描抽样和调查对四类行为指标进行联合评估","authors":"A. Ruet, C. Arnould, J. Lemarchand, C. Parias, N. Mach, M. Moisan, A. Foury, C. Briant, L. Lansade","doi":"10.7120/09627286.31.3.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Domesticated horses ( Equus caballus) can be exposed to a compromised welfare state and detecting a deterioration in welfare is essential to modify the animals' living conditions appropriately. This study focused on four categories of behavioural indicators, as markers of poor\n welfare: stereotypies, aggressiveness towards humans, unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. In the scientific literature, at least three assessment methods can be used to evaluate them: the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol, behavioural observations using scans and\n surveys. The question remains as to whether all these three methods allow an effective assessment of the four categories of behavioural indicators. To address this issue, the repeatability at a three-month interval and convergent validity of each measure (correlations between methods) were\n investigated on 202 horses housed in loose boxes. Overall, the repeatability and convergent validity were limited, highlighting the difficulty in assessing these indicators in horses. However, stereotypies and aggressiveness measures showed higher repeatability and convergent validity than\n those of unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. Behavioural observations using scans enabled the four categories of behavioural indicators to be detected more effectively. Suggestions of improvements are proposed for one-off measures such as those performed with the AWIN protocol.\n Regardless of the assessment method, very limited correlations were observed between the four categories of behavioural indicators, suggesting that they should all be included in a set of indicators used to assess the welfare state of horses, in conjunction with physiological and health measures.","PeriodicalId":7894,"journal":{"name":"Animal Welfare","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Horse welfare: A joint assessment of four categories of behavioural indicators using the AWIN protocol, scan sampling and surveys\",\"authors\":\"A. Ruet, C. Arnould, J. Lemarchand, C. Parias, N. Mach, M. Moisan, A. Foury, C. Briant, L. Lansade\",\"doi\":\"10.7120/09627286.31.3.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Domesticated horses ( Equus caballus) can be exposed to a compromised welfare state and detecting a deterioration in welfare is essential to modify the animals' living conditions appropriately. This study focused on four categories of behavioural indicators, as markers of poor\\n welfare: stereotypies, aggressiveness towards humans, unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. In the scientific literature, at least three assessment methods can be used to evaluate them: the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol, behavioural observations using scans and\\n surveys. The question remains as to whether all these three methods allow an effective assessment of the four categories of behavioural indicators. To address this issue, the repeatability at a three-month interval and convergent validity of each measure (correlations between methods) were\\n investigated on 202 horses housed in loose boxes. Overall, the repeatability and convergent validity were limited, highlighting the difficulty in assessing these indicators in horses. However, stereotypies and aggressiveness measures showed higher repeatability and convergent validity than\\n those of unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. Behavioural observations using scans enabled the four categories of behavioural indicators to be detected more effectively. Suggestions of improvements are proposed for one-off measures such as those performed with the AWIN protocol.\\n Regardless of the assessment method, very limited correlations were observed between the four categories of behavioural indicators, suggesting that they should all be included in a set of indicators used to assess the welfare state of horses, in conjunction with physiological and health measures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Animal Welfare\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Animal Welfare\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.008\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"VETERINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Animal Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.31.3.008","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"VETERINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Horse welfare: A joint assessment of four categories of behavioural indicators using the AWIN protocol, scan sampling and surveys
Domesticated horses ( Equus caballus) can be exposed to a compromised welfare state and detecting a deterioration in welfare is essential to modify the animals' living conditions appropriately. This study focused on four categories of behavioural indicators, as markers of poor
welfare: stereotypies, aggressiveness towards humans, unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. In the scientific literature, at least three assessment methods can be used to evaluate them: the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol, behavioural observations using scans and
surveys. The question remains as to whether all these three methods allow an effective assessment of the four categories of behavioural indicators. To address this issue, the repeatability at a three-month interval and convergent validity of each measure (correlations between methods) were
investigated on 202 horses housed in loose boxes. Overall, the repeatability and convergent validity were limited, highlighting the difficulty in assessing these indicators in horses. However, stereotypies and aggressiveness measures showed higher repeatability and convergent validity than
those of unresponsiveness to the environment and hypervigilance. Behavioural observations using scans enabled the four categories of behavioural indicators to be detected more effectively. Suggestions of improvements are proposed for one-off measures such as those performed with the AWIN protocol.
Regardless of the assessment method, very limited correlations were observed between the four categories of behavioural indicators, suggesting that they should all be included in a set of indicators used to assess the welfare state of horses, in conjunction with physiological and health measures.
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.