Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T01:21:23.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Can environmental variables replace some animal-based parameters in welfare assessment of dairy cows?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

C Mülleder ,
J Troxler ,
G Laaha  and
S Waiblinger
C Mülleder*
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
J Troxler
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
G Laaha
Affiliation:
Institute of Applied Statistics and Computing, University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna
S Waiblinger
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Welfare, University of Veterinary Medicine Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Animal-related parameters best fulfil the requirements of a valid welfare assessment, but often they are less feasible than other parameters. Therefore, this paper examines whether animal-based parameters are connected with each other and with environmental factors in order to find out if some can be discarded without loss of information.

Eighty Austrian dairy herds (21-55 Simmental cows) housed in loose-housing cubicles were visited. Housing, management and the human-animal relationship were assessed. Animal-based parameters such as lameness, skin lesions and social behaviour were recorded. For the statistical analysis, Spearman correlation coefficients and regression trees with additional cross-validations for the assessment of the predictive performance of models were calculated.

The animal-based parameters could be explained by environmental variables only around 2/3 (goodness of fit). The calculated regression trees explained 62% of the percentage of lame animals, 58% of leg injuries on the carpal joints and 69% of the agonistic interactions. Leg injuries on the tarsal joints could be explained to quite a high degree (77%). Cross-validated regression trees, however, which are more significant for prediction on farms in excess of this study, accounted for 31% of the total variance of lameness, 44% of the leg injuries on the tarsal joints, 33% on the carpal joints and 25% of the agonistic interactions.

Only a few correlations between animal-related parameters were found: lameness was correlated with leg injuries on the tarsal joints and on the carpal joints. Leg injuries were correlated with each other.

Due to the lack of interrelations between animal-related parameters and the moderate prediction by environmental factors, we do not suggest replacing the investigated animal-related parameters for on-farm welfare assessment in dairy cattle.

Keywords

animal-based parametersanimal healthanimal welfaredairy cowsenvironmental parameterson-farm welfare assessment
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 16 , Issue 2: Special Issue: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on the Assessment of Animal Welfare at Farm and Group Level , May 2007 , pp. 153 - 156
Copyright
© 2007 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Breimann, L, Friedmann, JH, Olshen, R and Stone, CJ 1984 Classification and Regression Trees. Wadsworth Internation Group: Belmont, California, USAGoogle Scholar
Capdeville, J and Veissier, I 2001 A method of assessing welfare in loose housed dairy cows at farm level, focusing on animal observeration. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Supplement 30: 62–68Google Scholar
Johnsen, PF, Johannesson, T and Sandøe, P 2001 Assessment of farm animal welfare at Herd Level: Many Goals, Many Methods. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Supplement 30: 26–33Google Scholar
Metzner, M, Heuwieder, W and Klee, W 1993 Die Beurteilung der Körperkondition (body condition scoring) im Herdenmanagement. Der praktische Tierarzt 11: 991–998Google Scholar
Mülleder, C, Troxler, J and Waiblinger, S 2003 Methodological aspects when assessing social behaviour and avoidance distance on dairy cattle farms. Animal Welfare 12: 597–584Google Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Knierim, U and Winckler, C 2001 The development of an epidemiologically based on-farm welfare assessment system for use with dairy cows. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Supplement 30: 73–77Google Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C and Coleman, G 2002 The relationship between attitudes, personal characteristics and behaviour of stockpeople and subsequent behaviour and production of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79: 195–219Google Scholar
Winckler, C and Willen, S 2001 The reliability and repeatability of a lameness scoring system for use as an indicator of welfare in dairy cattle. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Supplement 30: 103–107Google Scholar
Winckler, C, Capdeville, J, Gebresenbet, G, Hörning, B, Roiha, U, Tosi, M and Waiblinger, S 2003 Selection of parameters for on-farm welfare assessment protocols in cattle and buffalo. Animal Welfare 12: 619–624Google Scholar