Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-m8s7h Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T15:33:58.955Z 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: cornelia.muelleder@gmx.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

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