The influence of facility and home pen design on the welfare of the laboratory-housed dog.
The influence of facility and home pen design on the welfare of the laboratory-housed dog.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.vascn.2016.09.005
复制
发表时间：
2017-01
影响因子：
1.9
通讯作者：
Buchanan-Smith HM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Scullion Hall LE;Robinson S;Finch J;Buchanan-Smith HM
我们有道德和科学的义务来完善实验室饲养的狗生活的各个方面。在整个行业中，设施、家庭围栏设计和饲养之间存在许多差异，犬的特征也存在差异，如品系、性别和科学方案。因此，了解这些因素如何影响福利，从而影响科学产出至关重要。狗的生命中有很大一部分是在家庭围栏中度过的，因此，设计可以对福利产生相当大的影响。虽然存在最佳实践指南，但缺乏经验证据支持建议的改进，而且各行业的采用情况各不相同。在这项研究中，我们研究了现代和传统的家庭围栏设计，整体设施设计，畜牧业，历史的监管程序，应变和性别的福利指示行为和机械压力阈值的影响。在家庭畜栏中观察了来自两个机构的六组犬（总计n=46），并测试了机械压力阈值。与传统的家庭围栏设计或传统设施相比，在专门建造的现代设施或现代设计的家庭围栏中饲养的狗显示出最少的负福利行为指标（如警觉或踱步行为）和更多的正福利指标（如休息）。福利指示行为并没有随着应变而变化，但雄性犬表现出更多的负面福利指示行为，并且这些行为的变化比雌性犬更大。我们的研究结果显示，具有较高机械压力阈值的犬具有更多积极的福利指示行为。我们的结论是，与家庭围栏设计和在设施水平实施细化相关的因素对实验室饲养犬的福利产生了显著的积极影响，并对科学终点产生了潜在的伴随影响。
We have an ethical and scientific obligation to Refine all aspects of the life of the laboratory-housed dog. Across industry there are many differences amongst facilities, home pen design and husbandry, as well as differences in features of the dogs such as strain, sex and scientific protocols. Understanding how these influence welfare, and hence scientific output is therefore critical. A significant proportion of dogs' lives are spent in the home pen and as such, the design can have a considerable impact on welfare. Although best practice guidelines exist, there is a paucity of empirical evidence to support the recommended Refinements and uptake varies across industry. In this study, we examine the effect of modern and traditional home pen design, overall facility design, husbandry, history of regulated procedures, strain and sex on welfare-indicating behaviours and mechanical pressure threshold. Six groups of dogs from two facilities (total n=46) were observed in the home pen and tested for mechanical pressure threshold. Dogs which were housed in a purpose-built modern facility or in a modern design home pen showed the fewest behavioural indicators of negative welfare (such as alert or pacing behaviours) and more indicators of positive welfare (such as resting) compared to those in a traditional home pen design or traditional facility. Welfare indicating behaviours did not vary consistently with strain, but male dogs showed more negative welfare indicating behaviours and had greater variation in these behaviours than females. Our findings showed more positive welfare indicating behaviours in dogs with higher mechanical pressure thresholds. We conclude that factors relating to the design of home pens and implementation of Refinements at the facility level have a significant positive impact on the welfare of laboratory-housed dogs, with a potential concomitant impact on scientific endpoints.