Abstract
On-farm welfare assessment gives the opportunity to monitor and improve the quality of the animal life on the farm. In order to build the first Italian public standard for the welfare of indoor reared beef cattle, a list of 25 potential hazards and 22 potential promoters of beef cattle welfare was judged by a group of national experts by taking into account their negative or positive impacts on the welfare-state of the target population. In addition, the experts were asked to rank a list of 11 animal-based measures for identifying the most appropriate and important for measuring negative welfare outcomes in beef cattle. Based on experts’ ratings, an “impact score” (ISoverall) was calculated for the proposed measures. Management hazards and promoters were ranked to have a greater impact on beef cattle welfare than housing factors. Keeping cattle in large (≥ 40 animals) and heterogeneous groups obtained the highest ISoverall among the proposed hazards (ISoverall = 5.54), followed by the presence of animals without free access to drinking water (ISoverall = 4.39) and the use of high-concentrate corn silage diets (concentrate > 80% and fiber < 6%) (ISoverall = 4.39). On the other hand, housing animals in small (≤ 20 animals) and homogeneous groups (ISoverall = 5.41), checking them at least twice a day (ISoverall = 4.62) and rearing cattle in loose housing systems with access to an outdoor area/pasture (ISoverall = 4.27) were ranked among the top 3 promoters. Concerning animal-based measures, experts scored lameness, severe respiratory diseases, body condition scoring and mortality rate to be measures most important for assessing serious welfare impairment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Acharya RY, Hemsworth PH, Coleman GJ, Kinder JE (2022) The animal-human interface in farm animal production: animal fear, stress. Reprod Welf Anim 12:487. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12040487
Alonso ME, González-Montaña JR, Lomillos JM (2020) Consumers’ concerns and perceptions of farm animal welfare. Animals 10(3):385. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10030385
Alvåsen K, Mörk MJ, Dohoo IR, Sandgren CH, Thomsen PT, Emanuelson U (2014) Risk factors associated with on-farm mortality in Swedish dairy cows. Prev Vet Med 117:110–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2014.08.011
Aspinall W (2010) A route to more tractable expert advice. Nature 463:294–295. https://doi.org/10.1038/463294a
Bäßler SC, Kenéz A, Scheu T, Koch C, Meyer U, Dänicke S, Huber K (2021) Association between alterations in plasma metabolome profiles and laminitis in intensively finished Holstein bulls in a randomized controlled study. Sci Rep 11:12735. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92163-6
Beaver A, Weary DM, von Keyserlingk MAG (2021) The welfare of dairy cattle housed in tiestalls compared to less-restrictive housing types: A systematic review. J Dairy Sci 104(9):9383–9417. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2020-19609
Bertocchi L, Fusi F, Angelucci A, Bolzoni L, Pongolini S, Strano RM, Ginestreti J, Riuzzi G, Moroni P, Lorenzi V (2018) Characterization of hazards, welfare promoters and animal-based measures for the welfare assessment of dairy cows: Elicitation of expert opinion. Prev Vet Med 150:8–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2017.11.023
Ceballos MC, SantAnna AC, Boivin X, de Oliveira Costa F, de L. Carvalhal MV, Paranhos da Costa MJR (2018) Impact of good practices of handling training on beef cattle welfare and stockpeople attitudes and behaviors. Livest Sci 2016:24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2018.06.019
Cozzi G, Brscic M, Gottardo F (2009) Main critical factors affecting the welfare of beef cattle and veal calves raised under intensive rearing systems in Italy: a review. Ital J Anim Sci 8(Suppl 1):67–80. https://doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.67
Crump A, Jenkins K, Bethell EJ, Ferris CP, Kabboush H, Weller J, Arnott G (2021) Optimism and pasture access in dairy cows. Sci Rep 11:4882. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84371-x
de Graaf S, Ampe B, Winckler C, Radeski M, Mounier L, Kirchner MK, Haskell MJ, van Eerdenburg FJCM, de Boyerdes des Roches A, Andreasen SN, Bijttebier J, Lauwers L, Verbeke W, Tuyttens FAM (2017) Trained-user opinion about Welfare Quality measures and integrated scoring of dairy cattle welfare. J Dairy Sci 100(8):6376–6388. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2016-12255
Delabouglise A, James A, Valarcher JF, Hagglünd S, Raboisson D, Rushton J (2017) Linking disease epidemiology and livestock productivity: The case of bovine respiratory disease in France. PLoS ONE 12(12):e0189090. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189090
Diana A, Lorenzi V, Penasa M, Magni E, Alborali GL, Bertocchi L, De Marchi M (2020) Effect of welfare standards and biosecurity practices on antimicrobial use in beef cattle. Sci Rep 10:20939. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-77838-w
Ebinghaus A, Matull K, Knierim U, Ivemeyer S (2022) Associations between Dairy Herds’ qualitative behavior and aspects of herd health, stockperson and farm factors - A cross-sectional exploration. Animals 12(2):182. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12020182
Edwards LE, Hemsworth PH (2021) The impact of management, husbandry and stockperson decisions on the welfare of laying hens in Australia. Anim Prod Sci 61:944–967. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN19664
EFSA (2009) Scientific opinion of the panel on Animal Health and Welfare on a request from the Commission on the risk assessment of the impact of housing, nutrition and feeding, management and genetic selection on behaviour, fear and pain problems in dairy cows. EFSA J 1139:1–68. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1139
EFSA (2012a) Scientific opinion on the welfare of cattle kept for beef production and the welfare in intensive calf farming systems. EFSA J 10(5):2669. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2669
EFSA (2012b) Scientific opinion of the panel on Animal Health and Welfare: guidance on risk assessment for animal welfare. EFSA J 10(1):2513. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2513
EFSA (2012c) Scientific opinion of the panel on Animal Health and Welfare on the use of animal-based measures to assess welfare of dairy cows. EFSA J 10(1):2554. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2554
EFSA (2014a) Guidance on expert knowledge elicitation in food and feed safety risk assessment. EFSA J 12(6):3734. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3734
EFSA (2014b) Scientific opinion of the panel on Animal Health and Welfare on the welfare risks related to the farming of sheep for wool, meat and milk production. EFSA J 12(12):3933. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3933
Elmore MRP, Elischer MF, Claeys MC, Pajor EA (2015) The effects of different flooring types on the behavior, health, and welfare of finishing beef steers. J Anim Sci 93(3):1258–1266. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2014-8399
European Union Council (1998) Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes. Off J of the Eur Communities L221:23–27
Eurostat (2020) Agriculture, forestry and fishery statistics. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3217494/12069644/KS-FK-20-001-EN-N.pdf/a7439b01-671b-80ce-85e4-4d803c44340a?t=1608139005821. Accessed 13.10.2021
Fusi F, Lorenzi V, Franceschini G, Compiani R, Harper V, Ginestreti J, Ferrara G, Sgoifo Rossi CA, Bertocchi L (2021) Animal welfare and biosecurity assessment: A comparison between Italian and Irish beef cattle rearing systems. Anim Prod Sci 61(1):55–63. https://doi.org/10.1071/AN19611
Grandin T (2017) On-farm conditions that compromise animal welfare that can be monitored at the slaughter plant. Meat Sci 132:52–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.05.004
Grandin T (2018) Welfare problems in cattle, pigs, and sheep that persist even though scientific research clearly shows how to prevent them. Animals 8:124. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8070124
Greenwood PL (2021) Review: An overview of beef production from pasture and feedlot globally, as demand for beef and the need for sustainable practices increase. Animal 15(Supp. 1):100295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2021.100295
Gygax L, Neisen G, Wechsler B (2010) Socio-spatial relationships in dairy cows. Ethology 116:10–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2009.01708.x
Hubbard AJ, Foster MJ, Daigle CL (2021) Social dominance in beef cattle - A scoping review. Appl Anim Behav Sci 241:105390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105390
ISMEA - Institute for Studies, Research and Information on the Agricultural Market (2017) La competitività dell’allevamento bovino da carne in Italia: Sistemi aziendali a confronto. https://www.reterurale.it/flex/cm/pages/ServeAttachment.php/L/IT/D/6%252F7%252Fb%252FD.c0bc6da98424bbc14773/P/BLOB%3AID%3D16998/E/pdf. Accessed 02.11.2021
Keeling LJ, Winckler C, Hintze S, Forkman B (2021) Towards a positive welfare protocol for cattle: A critical review of indicators and suggestion of how we might proceed. Front Anim Sci 2:753080. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2021.753080
Kirchner MK, Westerath-Niklaus HS, Knierim U, Tessitore E, Cozzi G, Vogl C, Winckler C (2014) Attitudes and expectations of beef farmers in Austria, Germany and Italy towards the Welfare Quality® assessment system. Livest Sci 160:102–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2013.12.004
Lawrence AB, Newberry RC, Špinka M (2018) 15 - Positive welfare: What does it add to the debate over pig welfare? In: Špinka M (ed) Advances in Pig Welfare. Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition, United Kingdom, pp 415–444
Losada-Espinosa N, Villarroel M, María GA, Miranda-de la Lama GC (2018) Pre-slaughter cattle welfare indicators for use in commercial abattoirs with voluntary monitoring systems: A systematic review. Meat Sci 138:34–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2017.12.004
Magrin L, Brscic M, Lora I, Rumor C, Tondello L, Cozzi G, Gottardo F (2017) Effect of a ceiling fan ventilation system on finishing young bulls’ health, behaviour and growth performance. Animal 11(6):1084–1092. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731116002482
Magrin L, Brscic M, Armato L, Contiero B, Cozzi G, Gottardo F (2018) An overview of claw disorders at slaughter in finishing beef cattle reared in intensive indoor systems through a cross-sectional study. Prev Vet Med 161:83–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2018.10.018
Magrin L, Gottardo F, Brscic M, Contiero B, Cozzi G (2019) Health, behaviour and growth performance of Charolais and Limousin bulls fattened on different types of flooring. Animal 13(11):2603–2611. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175173111900106X
Mattiello S, Battini M, De Rosa G, Napolitano F, Dwyer C (2019) How can we assess positive welfare in ruminants? Animals 9:758. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100758
McConnel CS, Garry FB, Lombard JE, Kidd JA, Hill AE, Gould DH (2009) A necropsy-based descriptive study of dairy cow deaths on a Colorado dairy. J Dairy Sci 92:1954–1962. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1505
Mellor DJ, Webster JR (2014) Development of animal welfare understanding drives change in minimum welfare standards. Rev Sci Tech OIE 33(1):121–130. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.33.1.2258
Mõtus K, Reimus K, Orro T, Viltrop A, Emanuelson U (2017) On-farm mortality, causes and risk factors in Estonian beef cow-calf herds. Prev Vet Med 139:10–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.10.014
Mõtus K, Niinea T, Viltrop A, Emanuelson U (2020) Herd-level on-farm mortality in extensively managed beef herds. J Appl Anim Welf Sci 23(4):447–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2019.1696679
Nagaraja TG, Lechtenberg KF (2007) Acidosis in feedlot cattle. Vet Clin N Am-Food A 23(2):333–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvfa.2007.04.002
Nielsen BH, Angelucci A, Scalvenzi A, Forkman B, Fusi F, Tuyttens F, Houe H, Blokhuis H, Sørensen JT, Rothmann J, Matthews L, Mounier L, Bertocchi L, Richard M, Donati M, Nielsen PP, Salini R, de Graaf S, Hild S, Messori S, Nielsen SS, Lorenzi V, Boivin X, Thomsen PT (2014) External Scientific Report on the Use of Animal Based Measures for the Assessment of Dairy Cow Welfare. EFSA supporting publication EN-659. https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2014.EN-659
OIE (2021) Chapter 7.9 - Animal welfare and beef cattle production systems. In: OIE - Terrestrial Animal Health Code. OIE, Paris. https://www.oie.int/en/what-we-do/standards/codes-and-manuals/terrestrial-code-online-access/?id=169&L=1&htmfile=chapitre_aw_beef_cattle.htm. Accessed 18.03.2022
Park RM, Foster M, Daigle CL (2020) A scoping review: The impact of housing systems and environmental features on beef cattle welfare. Animals 10:565. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10040565
Platz S, Ahrens F, Bahrs E, Nüske S, Erhard MH (2007) Association between floor type and behaviour, skin lesions, and claw dimensions in group-housed fattening bulls. Prev Vet Med 80:209–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2007.02.007
Pol F, Kling-Eveillard F, Champigneulle F, Fresnay E, Ducrocq M, Courboulay V (2021) Human-animal relationship influences husbandry practices, animal welfare and productivity in pig farming. Animal 15(2):100103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.animal.2020.100103
Pritchard RH, Bruns KW (2003) Controlling variation in feed intake through bunk management. J Anim Sci 81(14 Suppl 2):E133–E138. https://doi.org/10.2527/2003.8114_suppl_2E133x
Santinello M, Diana A, De Marchi M, Scali F, Bertocchi L, Lorenzi V, Alborali GL, Penasa M (2022) Promoting judicious antimicrobial use in beef production: The role of quarantine. Animals 12:116. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12010116
SCAHAW (2001) The welfare of cattle kept for beef production. SANCO.C.2/AH/R22/2000. https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/742/1/eu-2001-cattle-welfare.pdf. Accessed 02.11.2021
Schwartzkopf-Genswein KS, Beauchemin KA, Gibb DJ, Crews DH, Hickman DD, Streeter M, McAllister TA (2003) Effect of bunk management on feeding behavior, ruminal acidosis and performance of feedlot cattle: A review. J Anim Sci 81(14 Suppl 2):E149–E158. https://doi.org/10.2527/2003.8114_suppl_2E149x
Studer E, Schönecker L, Meylan M, Stucki D, Dijkman R, Holwerda M, Glaus A, Becker J (2021) Prevalence of BRD-related viral pathogens in the upper respiratory tract of Swiss veal calves. Animals 11(7):1940. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11071940
Temple D, Llonch P, Mainau E, Manteca X (2018) 12 - On-farm and post-mortem health assessment. In: Špinka M (ed) Advances in Pig Welfare. Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition, United Kingdom, pp 357–379
Thomsen PT, Houe H (2006) Dairy cow mortality. A Review Vet Quart 28:122–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/01652176.2006.9695218
Thomsen PT, Houe H (2018) Cow mortality as an indicator of animal welfare in dairy herds. Res Vet Sci 119:239–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rvsc.2018.06.021
Thomsen PT, Dahl-Pedersen K, Jensen HE (2012) Necropsy as a means to gain additional information about causes of dairy cow deaths. J Dairy Sci 95:5798–5803. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-5625
Tucker CB, Coetzee JF, Stookey JM, Thomson DU, Grandin T, Schwartzkopf-Genswein KS (2015) Beef cattle welfare in the USA: identification of priorities for future research. Anim Health Res Rev 16(2):107–124. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1466252315000171
Tuyttens FAM, de Graaf S, Andreasen SN, de Boyer des Roches A, van Eerdenburg FJCM, Haskell MJ, Kirchner MK, Mounier L, Kjosevski M, Bijttebier J, Lauwers L, Verbeke W, Ampe B (2021) Using Expert Elicitation to abridge the welfare quality® protocol for monitoring the most adverse dairy cattle welfare impairments. Front Vet Sci 8:634470. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2021.634470
Van laer E, Moons CPH, Sonck B, Tuyttens FAM (2014) Importance of outdoor shelter for cattle in temperate climates. Livest Sci 159:87–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2013.11.003
Ventura BA, Weary DM, Giovanetti AS, von Keyserlingk MAG (2016) Veterinary perspectives on cattle welfare challenges and solutions. Livest Sci 193:95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2016.10.004
Ventura G, Lorenzi V, Mazza F, Clemente GA, Iacomino C, Bertocchi L, Fusi F (2021) Best farming practices for the welfare of dairy cows. Heifers and Calves Animals 11(9):2645. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11092645
Welfare Quality (2009a) Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for cattle. Welfare Quality® Consortium, Lelystad, The Netherlands. http://www.welfarequalitynetwork.net/network/45627/9/0/40. Accessed 02.11.2021
Welfare Quality (2009b) Welfare Quality Reports N.11 “Assessment of Animal Welfare Measures for Dairy Cattle, Beef Bulls and Veal Calves”. Welfare Quality® Consortium, Lelystad, The Netherlands. http://www.welfarequality.net/media/1121/wqr11.pdf. Accessed 02.11.2021
Whay HR, Main DCJ, Green LE, Webster AJF (2003) Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens: consensus of expert opinion. Anim Welf 12:205–217
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the 14 veterinarians that took part to the expert opinion elicitation.
Funding
This work was supported by the Italian Ministry of Health (Grant RUMINANTWELFARE).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Conceptualization: Bertocchi L, Fusi F, Lorenzi V, Sgoifo Rossi CA; Compiani R; Methodology: Bertocchi L, Fusi F, Lorenzi V; Bolzoni L; Formal analysis and investigation: Bertocchi L, Fusi F, Lorenzi V; Sgoifo Rossi CA; Compiani R, Bolzoni L; Writing—original draft preparation: Lorenzi V, Grossi S; Writing—review and editing: Lorenzi V, Grossi S; Mazza F, Clemente GA, Fusi F; Funding acquisition: Bertocchi L; Supervision: Bertocchi L, Fusi F, Lorenzi V. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lorenzi, V., Sgoifo Rossi, C.A., Compiani, R. et al. Using Expert Elicitation for ranking hazards, promoters and animal-based measures for on-farm welfare assessment of indoor reared beef cattle: an Italian experience. Vet Res Commun 47, 141–158 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-022-09939-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11259-022-09939-y