Perspectives on Physiological Measures of Animal Welfare in Chronic Conditions

A special issue of Animals (ISSN 2076-2615). This special issue belongs to the section "Animal Welfare".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 March 2021) | Viewed by 4350

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
School of Life Sciences and Proteomics Core Facility, Faculty of Science, The University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo 2007, Australia
Interests: animal welfare; animal law; stress hormones; live export; intensive animal farming

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
St Catharine’s College and Department of Veterinary Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Interests: welfare assessment; stress; sustainability; sentience; ethics; control of behaviour
Special Issues, Collections and Topics in MDPI journals

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Measures of animal welfare often include assays of physiological factors, such as levels of adrenal hormones (cortisol, corticosterone) and other hormones such as oxytocin, blood cells, proteins, heart-rate, respiration rate, immune system effects, and a range of brain changes. Physiological measures can be valuable welfare indicators, especially for short-term welfare problems, providing interpretation includes reference to other measures and relevant context. However, some physiological measures give little information about how poor welfare is over the long-term, for example during long-term confinement, or about how good the welfare of the individual is. Furthermore, it is important to understand what changes in physiological measures tell us about the efficacy of coping attempts. What changes are of real significance to the animal?

We invite original research papers or short reviews that focus on the use of physiological measures to assess the extent of positive or negative animal welfare during living conditions, chronic interventions or disease. Such human interventions might include long-term confinement, prolonged transport or other actions with long-term effects such as maternal–offspring separation. Submissions should particularly address the relevance of changes observed or not observed for the functional and clinical status of the animal. We also invite papers or short reviews on relevant technical issues involved in these measures related to specificity, accuracy, and reproducibility of assays.

Dr. Malcolm P. Caulfield
Prof. Donald Broom
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Animals is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • cortisol
  • corticosterone
  • oxytocin
  • physiology
  • immunology
  • brain mechanisms
  • stress
  • welfare
  • housing
  • transport

Published Papers (1 paper)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

17 pages, 1800 KiB  
Article
Effects of Wash Protocol and Contamination Level on Concentrations of Cortisol and Dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) in Swine Hair
by Darian S. Pollock, David M. Janz, Diego Moya and Yolande M. Seddon
Animals 2021, 11(11), 3104; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11113104 - 30 Oct 2021
Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2189
Abstract
The effect of washing procedure and contamination level on the concentrations of cortisol and dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) in swine hair was explored over two studies. Hair shaved from finisher pigs (n = 8) and sows (n = 8, cortisol study 1 only) [...] Read more.
The effect of washing procedure and contamination level on the concentrations of cortisol and dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) in swine hair was explored over two studies. Hair shaved from finisher pigs (n = 8) and sows (n = 8, cortisol study 1 only) was split into two treatments (two hair samples/pig) to receive either three isopropanol or methanol washes, and two paired subsamples of hair were contaminated with feces and urine, mildly or severely. Samples were further subdivided and received one, three, or five methanol washes. Hormone concentrations were quantified from the hair and wash solvent, and the ratio of hormones in the solvent to that in the hair calculated. When grouping sow and grower hair together for analysis, hair cortisol concentrations were 13% greater after three isopropanol washes compared to methanol (22.84 ± 3.12 vs. 19.77 ± 2.64 pg/mg, respectively). When analyzing sow and grower hair separately, sow hair cortisol concentrations were 20% higher following three isopropanol washes compared to methanol washes (22.06 ± 5.21 vs. 27.72 ± 5.65 pg/mg), with no differences in grower pig hair concentrations. The solvent cortisol concentrations did not differ with wash solvent. No differences were seen for DHEA. Contamination level did not influence hormone concentrations. Hair cortisol concentrations were 24% higher after one wash compared to five washes (11.98 ± 1.47 vs. 9.05 ± 0.92 pg/mg), whereas the solvent cortisol concentrations were 80% and 84% higher after one wash compared to three and five washes, respectively (21.09 ± 4.04 vs. 4.21 ± 1.62 vs. 3.36 ± 1.32 pg/mg). The solvent–hair cortisol ratio was 65% and 73% higher following one wash compared to three and five washes (1.36 ± 0.80 vs. 0.47 ± 0.12 vs. 0.37 ± 0.14). Hair DHEA concentrations were 39% higher after one wash compared to five washes (42.39 ± 6.87 vs. 26.02 ± 5.69 pg/mg). The solvent DHEA concentrations, and the solvent–hair ratio for DHEA were 94% and 98% and 92% and 98% higher going from one wash to three and five washes, respectively (solvent: 5.07 ± 0.26 vs. 0.28 ± 0.12 vs. 0.12 ± 0.09 pg/mg and solvent–hair ratio: 0.13 ± 0.006 vs. 0.010 ± 0.004 vs. 0.003 ± 0.002). Following three methanol washes, the non-contaminated hair had 46% and 48% higher hair (17.47 ± 1.12 vs. 9.35 ± 0.80 vs. 9.05 ± 1.06 pg/mg) and a 76% and 72% higher solvent (16.31 ± 8.07 vs. 3.92 ± 0.50 vs. 4.50 ± 2.31 pg/mg) cortisol concentration compared to mild and severely contaminated hair, respectively. Wash solvent influences cortisol concentrations in swine hair, but not DHEA. Contaminated swine hair should be avoided in analyses when possible. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop