Whittaker Alexandra L, Golder-Dewar Brianna, Triggs Jordyn L, Sherwen Sally L, McLelland David J
Roseworthy Campus, School of Animal and Veterinary Sciences, The University of Adelaide, Roseworthy, SA 5371, Australia.
Wildlife Conservation and Science, Zoos Victoria, Melbourne, VIC 3052, Australia.
Animals (Basel). 2021 Jul 5;11(7):2010. doi: 10.3390/ani11072010.
There is an increasing focus on evidence-based welfare assessment by animal care staff in zoos, along with a strong interest in animal welfare by the zoo-visiting public, to the extent that this can influence their choice of institutions to visit. Regulatory oversight of animal welfare standards continues to strengthen across many jurisdictions. Zoos are increasingly formalizing their practices with the development and refinement of evidence-based welfare assessment tools. There has been a drive for welfare assessment tools to comprise both resource-based and animal-based measures. However, animal-based indicators are not always well characterized, in terms of their nature and whether they infer a positive or negative affective state. This is especially so for reptiles, which are often considered behaviorally inexpressive and are under-researched. In this study, a Delphi consultation approach was used to gather expert opinion on the suitability of potential animal-based indicators of welfare for inclusion in a welfare assessment tool across four families of reptiles: Agamidae, Chelidae, Pythonidae, and Testudinidae. Two rounds of online surveys were conducted eliciting responses from a global group of professionals who work with reptiles. In the first survey, respondents were provided with an author-derived list of potential animal-based indicators for consideration of their validity and practicality as welfare indicators. The indicators were refined for the second survey including only those indicators that were considered valid or practical on the first survey (≥4 on a 5-point Likert scale), and that achieved ≥70% consensus amongst experts. In the second survey, respondents were asked to re-evaluate the reliability and practicality of the indicators and to rank them on these facets. Eight to ten assessment indicators for each family of reptiles were identified from Survey 2. These indicators were often health related, for example, presence of oculo-nasal discharge or wounds. However, some true behavioral indicators were identified, such as showing species-specific interest and alertness. These indicators should now be incorporated into taxon-tailored welfare assessment tools for trial and validation in captive reptile populations. This study provides a next step towards developing reptile-specific animal welfare assessment tools for these often-overlooked animals.
动物园的动物护理人员越来越注重基于证据的福利评估,同时动物园游客也对动物福利表现出浓厚兴趣,这种兴趣甚至会影响他们选择参观的机构。在许多司法管辖区,对动物福利标准的监管监督持续加强。随着基于证据的福利评估工具的开发和完善,动物园越来越多地将其做法正规化。人们一直推动福利评估工具同时包含基于资源和基于动物的衡量标准。然而,就其性质以及是否能推断出积极或消极的情感状态而言,基于动物的指标并不总是有很好的特征描述。对于爬行动物来说尤其如此,它们通常被认为行为表现不明显且研究不足。在本研究中,采用德尔菲咨询方法,就适合纳入福利评估工具的潜在基于动物的福利指标,征求了全球范围内从事爬行动物工作的专业人士对四个爬行动物科(鬣蜥科、蛇颈龟科、蟒科和陆龟科)的意见。进行了两轮在线调查,征集全球范围内从事爬行动物工作的专业人士的回复。在第一次调查中,向受访者提供了一份作者列出的潜在基于动物的指标清单,以供他们考虑这些指标作为福利指标的有效性和实用性。对指标进行了完善以便进行第二次调查,只保留那些在第一次调查中被认为有效或实用(在5分制李克特量表上≥4分)且专家达成≥70%共识的指标。在第二次调查中,要求受访者重新评估这些指标的可靠性和实用性,并在这些方面对其进行排名。从第二次调查中为每个爬行动物科确定了八到十个评估指标。这些指标通常与健康有关,例如,是否有眼鼻分泌物或伤口。然而,也确定了一些真正的行为指标,如表现出特定物种的兴趣和警觉性。现在应将这些指标纳入针对特定分类群的福利评估工具中,以便在圈养爬行动物种群中进行试验和验证。这项研究为开发针对这些常被忽视动物的特定爬行动物福利评估工具迈出了下一步。