Evaluation of consistency over time of the use of the Animal Welfare Indicators protocol for horses

I Czycholl; K Büttner; P Klingbeil; J Krieter

doi:10.7120/09627286.30.1.081

Evaluation of consistency over time of the use of the Animal Welfare Indicators protocol for horses

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2023

I Czycholl ,

K Büttner ,

P Klingbeil and

J Krieter

Show author details

I Czycholl*: Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Olshausenstraße 40, 24118 Kiel, Germany
K Büttner: Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Olshausenstraße 40, 24118 Kiel, Germany Unit for Biomathematics and Data Processing, Facullty of Veterinary Medicine, Justus Liebig University, Frankfurter Str 95, 35392 Giessen, Germany
P Klingbeil: Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Olshausenstraße 40, 24118 Kiel, Germany
J Krieter: Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Breeding and Husbandry, Christian-Albrechts-University Kiel, Olshausenstraße 40, 24118 Kiel, Germany
*: * Contact for correspondence: iczycholl@tierzucht.uni-kiel.de

Article contents

Abstract
References

Rights & Permissions

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.

Consistency over time is a basic requirement for welfare assessment schemes since consistency must not depend, for example, on the day it is carried out. This study analysed the consistency of the indicators of the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocol for horses (Equus caballus) over time. Given the multi-dimensionality of animal welfare, the AWIN protocol includes a variety of indicators evaluating, eg the health status or the behaviour of the animals. Fourteen establishments keeping horses in Germany were visited four times each (day 0, day 3, day 42, day 90). For the evaluation of reliability and agreement between the different visits, ie across time, the reference visit on day 0 was compared to the other visits via calculation of Spearman's rank correlation (RS), intra-class correlation (ICC), smallest detectable change (SDC) and limits of agreement (LoA). The indicator, Qualitative Behaviour Assessment (QBA) was analysed by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). Most of the indicators demonstrated sufficient consistency over time. Indicators that were inconsistent included parts of the Horse Grimace Scale, outcomes of behavioural tests, the presence of swollen joints as well as the indicators hoof neglect, alopecia on the legs and water cleanliness. The QBA was consistent for the period of 42 days, but not for 90 days. Overall, those indicators with insufficient consistency over time require to be revised or replaced in future welfare assessment schemes.

Keywords

animal-based indicators animal welfare AWIN consistency horse reliability

Type: Research Article
Information: Animal Welfare , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , February 2021 , pp. 81 - 90

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.30.1.081 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: © 2021 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

AWIN 2015 AWIN welfare assessment protocol for horses. https://doi.org/10.13130/AWIN_HORSES_2015 CrossRef Google Scholar

Blokhuis, H, Jones, B, Veissier, I and Miele, M 2013 Improving farm animal welfare. In: Blokhuis, H, Miele, M, Veissier, I and Jones, B (eds) Improving Farm Animal Welfare pp 1–13. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen: The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-770-7_1 CrossRef Google Scholar

BMELV 1995 Leitlinien zur Beurteilung von Pferdehaltungen unter Tierschutzgesichtspunkten. Bundesministerium für Ernährung, Landwirtschaft und Verbraucherschutz (Sachverständigengruppe artge-rechte Pferdehaltung, BMELV). BMELV: Bonn, Germany. [Title translation: Guideline for the assessment of horse husbandry with regard to animal welfare]Google Scholar

Chamove, AS, Crawley-Hartrick, OJE and Stafford, KJ 2002 Horse reactions to human attitudes and behavior. Anthrozoös 15:323–331. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279302786992423 CrossRef Google Scholar

Couetil, LL, Hoffmann, AM, Hodgson, J, Buechner-Maxwell, V, Viel, L, Wood, JLN and Lavoie, JP 2007 Inflammatory air-way disease of horses. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 21:356–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-1676.2007.tb02975.x CrossRef Google Scholar

Courboulay, V, Eugene, A and Delarue, E 2009 Welfare assess-ment in 82 pig farms. Effect of animal age and floor type on behav-iour and injuries in fattening pigs. Animal Welfare 18: 515–521CrossRef Google Scholar

Czycholl, I, Büttner, K, Grosse Beilage, E and Krieter, J 2015 Review of the assessment of animal welfare with special emphasis on the Welfare Quality® animal welfare assessment protocol for growing pigs. Archives Animal Breeding 58: 237–249. https://doi.org/10.5194/aab-58-237-2015 CrossRef Google Scholar

Czycholl, I, Büttner, K, Klingbeil, P and Krieter, J 2018 An indication of reliability of the two-level approach of the AWIN Welfare assessment protocol for horses. Animals 8: 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8010007 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Czycholl, I, Grosse Beilage, E, Henning, C and Krieter, J 2017a Reliability of the qualitative behavior assessment as includ-ed in the Welfare Quality® Assessment protocol for growing pigs. Journal of Animal Science 95: 3445–3454. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2017.1525 Google Scholar

Czycholl, I, Klingbeil, P and Krieter, J 2017b Suitability of ani-mal-based indicators for the detection of animal welfare in hors-es. Tieraerztliche Umschau 6: 209–217Google Scholar

Czycholl, I, Klingbeil, P and Krieter, J 2019a Interobserver reli-ability of the AWIN welfare assessment protocol for horses. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science 75: 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jevs.2019.02.005 CrossRef Google Scholar

Czycholl, I, Menke, S, Straßburg, C and Krieter, J 2019b Reliability of different behavioural tests for growing pigs on-farm. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 213: 65–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2019.02.004 CrossRef Google Scholar

Dai, F, Cogi, NH, Heinzl, EUL, Dalla Costa, E, Canali, E and Minero, M 2015 Validation of a fear test in sport horses using infrared thermography. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research 10: 128–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2014.12.001 CrossRef Google Scholar

Dalla Costa, E, Dai, F, Lebelt, D, Scholz, P, Barbieri, S and Canali, E 2016a Welfare assessment of horses: the AWIN approach. Animal Welfare 25: 481–488. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.25.4.481 CrossRef Google Scholar

Dalla Costa, E, Dai, F, Lebelt, D, Scholz, P, Barbieri, S, Canali, E and Minero, M 2017 Initial outcomes of a harmonized approach to collect welfare data in sport and leisure horses. Animal 11: 254–260. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731116001452 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dalla Costa, E, Dai, F, Murray, LAM, Guazzetti, S, Canali, E and Minero, M 2015 A study on validity and reliability of on-farm tests to measure human–animal relationship in horses and don-keys. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 163: 110–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.12.007 CrossRef Google Scholar

Dalla Costa, E, Minero, M, Lebelt, D, Stucke, D, Canali, E and Leach, MC 2014 Development of the Horse Grimace Scale (HGS) as a pain assessment tool in horses undergoing routine castration. PLoS One 9: e92281. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0092281 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Dalla Costa, E, Stucke, D, Dai, F, Minero, M, Leach, MC and Lebelt, D 2016b Using the horse grimace scale (HGS) to assess pain associated with acute laminitis in horses (Equus caballus). Animals 6: 47. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6080047 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

de Vet, HCW, Terwee, CB, Knol, DL and Bouter, LM 2006 When to use agreement versus reliability measures. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 59: 1033–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.015 CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) 2012 EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare Statement on the use of animal-based measures to assess the welfare of animals. EFSA Journal 10:1–29. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2512 Google Scholar

Fraser, D 2008 Understanding animal welfare. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 50: S1. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0147-50-S1-S1 CrossRef Google Scholar

Ireland, JL, Clegg, PD, McGowan, CM, McKane, SA, Chandle, KJ and Pinchbeck, GL 2011 Disease prevalence in geriatric horses in the United Kingdom: Veterinary clinical assess-ment of 200 cases. Equine Veterinary Journal 44(1): 101–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2042-3306.2010.00361.x CrossRef Google Scholar

Jezierski, T, Jaworski, Z and Górecka, A 1999 Effects of han-dling on behaviour and heart rate in Konik horses: comparison of stable and forest reared youngstock. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00209-3 CrossRef Google Scholar

Knierim, U and Winckler, C 2009 On-farm welfare assessment in cattle. Validity, reliability and feasibility issues and future per-spectives with special regard to the Welfare Quality® approach. Animal Welfare 18: 451–458CrossRef Google Scholar

Martin, P and Bateson, P 2007 Measuring Behaviour. An Introductory Guide. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511810893 CrossRef Google Scholar

McCann, JS, Heird, JC, Bell, RW and Lutherer, LO 1988 Normal and more highly reactive horses. Part II: the effect of han-dling and reserpine on the cardiac response to stimuli. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 19: 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(88)90002-0 CrossRef Google Scholar

McGraw, KO and Wong, SP 1996 Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychological Methods 1(1): 30–46. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30 CrossRef Google Scholar

Mieloch, FJ, Nietfeld, S, Straßburg, C, Krieter, J, grosse Beilage, E and Czycholl, I 2020 Factors of potential influence on different behavioural tests in fattening pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 222: 104900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2019.104900 CrossRef Google Scholar

Miller, KA, Garner, JP and Mench, JA 2006 Is fearfulness a trait that can be measured with behavioural tests? A validation of four fear tests for Japanese quail. Animal Behaviour 71: 1323–1334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2005.08.018 CrossRef Google Scholar

Minero, M, Dalla Costa, E, Dai, F, Canali, E, Barbieri, S and Zanella, A 2018 Using qualitative behaviour assessment (QBA) to explore the emotional state of horses and its asso-ciation with human-animal relationship. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 204: 53–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applan-im.2018.04.008 CrossRef Google Scholar

O’Rourke, N and Hatcher, L 2013 Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling. SAS: Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar

Robinson, NE, Karmaus, W, Holcombe, SJ, Carr, EA and Derksen, FJ 2010 Airway inflammation in Michigan pleasure horses: prevalence and risk factors. Equine Veterinary Journal 38(4): 293–299. https://doi.org/10.2746/042516406777749281 CrossRef Google Scholar

SAS Institute 2008 SAS/STAT 9.2. User's Guide. SAS Institute: Cary, NC, USAGoogle Scholar

Temple, D, Manteca, X, Dalmau, A and Velarde, A 2013 Assessment of test-retest reliability of animal-based measures on growing pig farms. Livestock Science 151: 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.10.012 CrossRef Google Scholar

Thatcher, CD, Pleasant, RS, Geor, RJ and Elvinger, F 2012 Prevalence of over-conditioning in mature horses in Southwest Virginia during the summer. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 26: 1413–1418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1939-1676.2012.00995.x CrossRef Google Scholar

TierSchG 2006 Tierschutzgesetz in der Fassung der Bekanntmachung vom 18 Mai 2006 (BGBl. I S. 1206, 1313), das zuletzt durch Artikel 280 der Verordnung vom 19 Juni 2020 (BGBl I S 1328) geändert worden ist. [Title translation: German animal pro-tection directive]Google Scholar

TierSchVersV 2013 Tierschutz-Versuchstierverordnung vom 1 August 2013 (BGBl I S 3125, 3126), die zuletzt durch Artikel 394 der Verordnung vom 31 August 2015 (BGBl I S 1474) geändert worden ist. [Title translation: German experimental animals directive]Google Scholar

Velarde, A and Geers, R 2007 On Farm Monitoring of Pig Welfare. AE Wageningen: Gelderland, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-591-8 CrossRef Google Scholar

Visser, EK, Van Reenen, CG, Hopster, H, Schilder, MBH, Knaap, JH, Barneveld, A and Blokhuis, HJ 2001 Quantifying aspects of young horses’ temperament: consistency of behaviour-al variables. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 74: 241–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(01)00177-0 CrossRef Google Scholar

Wemelsfelder, F and Lawrence, AB 2001 Qualitative assess-ment of animal behaviour as an on-farm welfare-monitoring tool. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavice Section A-Animal Science 51: 21–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/090647001316923018 Google Scholar

Wemelsfelder, F and Millard, F 2009 Qualitative Behaviour Assessment. In: Forkmann, B and Keeling, L (eds) Welfare Quality® Reports. SLU Service/Reproenheten: Uppsala, SwedenGoogle Scholar

Wheeler RG, Christley RM and McGowan 2002 Prevalence of owner reported respiratory disease in Pony Club horses. The Veterinary Record 150: 79–80. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.150.3.79 CrossRef Google Scholar