Suppr超能文献

评估不同牧草供应水平的奶牛场的福利指标。

Assessment of welfare indicators in dairy farms offering pasture at differing levels.

机构信息

Department of Animal Science, University of Göttingen, 37075 Göttingen, Germany.

Faculty of Science and Technology, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, 39100 Bozen, Italy.

出版信息

Animal. 2019 Oct;13(10):2336-2347. doi: 10.1017/S1751731119000570. Epub 2019 Mar 28.

Abstract

In terms of animal welfare, farming systems of dairy cows are perceived positively by consumers when compared to pigs or poultry. A main reason is that the majority of consumers associate dairy farming with pasture, which in turn they relate with benefits for animal health and welfare. However, holistic scientific assessments of the effects of pasturing on animal welfare are rare. Hence, it was the aim to study the animal welfare level in 61 German loose housing dairy farms by using the measures of the Welfare Quality® protocol for dairy cattle (WQP). Data were collected twice per farm at the end of the pasture season (July to October) and approximately 6 months later at the end of the barn season (December to April). Farms were classified based on the duration cows had access to pasture per day during the pasture season: group 1 (G1)>10 h; group 2 (G2) 6 to 10 h; group 3 (G3)<6 h and group 4 (G4) without pasture access. The average herd size was 129 Holstein-Friesian or Red-Holstein cows (range 58 to 527). In addition to WQP data, performance data were gathered from routine herd data recordings. The indicators were aggregated to criteria applying the scoring system of the WQP. G4 received lower scores at the first than at the second visit for the criterion absence of hunger, while there were no differences between visits in the other groups (P=0.58 - group×farm visit effect). All pasturing groups were scored better at the end of the pasture season than G4 for the criterion comfort around resting (P<0.01). Compared with G1 for both farm visits and G2 for the end of the barn season, G4 reached inferior scores for the criterion absence of injuries, including indicators such as hairless patches, lesions, and swellings and lameness. At both assessments G2 was scored higher than the other groups for the criterion absence of diseases (P=0.04). In conclusion, pasture access had positive effects only on selected welfare indicators, however, these effects were not maintained throughout the barn season.

摘要

就动物福利而言,与养猪或家禽相比,消费者普遍认为奶牛养殖系统更有利于动物福利。主要原因是大多数消费者将奶牛养殖与牧场联系在一起,而他们认为这对动物的健康和福利有益。然而,对放牧对动物福利影响的全面科学评估却很少见。因此,本研究旨在使用奶牛福利质量评估协议(WQP)对德国 61 家自由放养奶牛场的动物福利水平进行研究。每个牧场在牧场季结束时(7 月至 10 月)和大约 6 个月后(12 月至 4 月)在每个牧场收集两次数据。根据奶牛在牧场季每天可接触牧场的时间长短对牧场进行分组:第 1 组(G1)>10 小时;第 2 组(G2)6-10 小时;第 3 组(G3)<6 小时;第 4 组(G4)没有牧场可接触。平均牛群规模为 129 头荷斯坦-弗里生或红荷斯坦奶牛(范围 58-527 头)。除了 WQP 数据外,还从常规牛群数据记录中收集了性能数据。将指标汇总到应用 WQP 评分系统的标准中。G4 在第一次和第二次访问时,在饥饿不存在的标准上的得分均低于第 4 组,而其他组在两次访问之间没有差异(P=0.58-组×牧场访问效应)。所有放牧组在牧场季结束时在休息舒适度标准上的得分均高于 G4(P<0.01)。与第一次和第二次访问的 G1 以及第二次访问的 G2 相比,G4 在受伤不存在的标准上的得分较差,包括无毛斑块、损伤、肿胀和跛行等指标。在两次评估中,G2 在疾病不存在的标准上的得分均高于其他组(P=0.04)。综上所述,牧场可接触仅对一些福利指标有积极影响,但这些影响在整个畜舍季节中并未持续。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验