比较四种系绳行走设备在减少拉扯和福利影响方面的功效。

BACKGROUND

Leash pulling is a commonly reported problem behavior for dog owners, as a result, a variety of leash equipment types are offered to mitigate pulling force. We were particularly interested in prong collars as their inherently aversive design has made their use a subject of debate. Though banned in certain countries and widely available in others, to date, there is no research comparing them to other leash walking equipment.

METHODS

We compared four types of leash walking equipment: a martingale (flat collar as baseline measure), a front-connection harness, a polymer prong-style collar (Starmark), and a standard metal prong collar. Twenty-three dogs were walked on all four types of equipment for 5-min each. Equipment was attached to a leash which was connected to a battery-powered strain gauge to measure the dog's pulling force. All walks were video recorded for behavior analysis.

RESULTS

There were statistically significant differences among the leash equipment types in pulling impulse (Newtons × seconds), (χ = 30.6, < 0.001). analysis revealed significant differences in impulse between the martingale and the other equipment: harness (Z = -3.69, < 0.001), Starmark collar (Z = -3.62, < 0.001) and prong collar (Z = -3.92, < 0.001). No other differences among equipment types were significant. Fifteen behaviors were examined as welfare indicators but only three: looking at the handler, lip licking, and sniffing occurred across all dogs and all walks. There was a statistically significant difference in frequency of lip licking behavior across the four types of leash-equipment (χ = 8.17, = 0.04) and analysis showed a difference between the martingale and the harness (Z = -2.65, = 0.008). While our research did not provide any clear evidence of poorer welfare due to equipment type, we caution the generalizability of these findings and recommend further assessment of these items of leash-walking equipment in real-life scenarios.

背景

leash pulling（遛狗时拉扯牵引绳）是狗主人经常报告的问题行为，因此，提供了各种类型的 leash equipment（牵引绳装备）来减轻拉力。我们特别关注 prong collars（叉状项圈），因为其固有的令人不快的设计使得它们的使用成为了一个有争议的话题。虽然在某些国家被禁止，但在其他国家却广泛可用，迄今为止，尚无研究将它们与其他 leash walking equipment（遛狗绳装备）进行比较。

方法

我们比较了四种 leash walking equipment（遛狗绳装备）：一种马缰式项圈（作为基线测量的扁平项圈）、一种前连接式马具、一种聚合物叉状项圈（Starmark）和一种标准金属叉状项圈。23 只狗分别在这四种 leash walking equipment 上各走 5 分钟。将 equipment 连接到连接到电池供电的应变计的 leash 上，以测量狗的拉力。所有的散步都进行了视频记录，以便进行行为分析。

结果

在 leash equipment types（遛狗绳装备类型）的拉力脉冲方面存在统计学上的显著差异（Newtons × seconds），（χ = 30.6， < 0.001）。分析表明，在 impulse（拉力脉冲）方面，马缰式项圈与其他 equipment 之间存在显著差异：马具（Z = -3.69， < 0.001）、Starmark 项圈（Z = -3.62， < 0.001）和叉状项圈（Z = -3.92， < 0.001）。其他 leash equipment types 之间没有显著差异。检查了 15 种行为作为福利指标，但只有 3 种行为在所有狗和所有散步中都出现：看着 handler（主人）、舔嘴唇和嗅探。在四种 leash-equipment（遛狗绳装备）类型的 lip licking 行为频率方面存在统计学上的显著差异（χ = 8.17， = 0.04），并且分析表明马缰式项圈和马具之间存在差异（Z = -2.65， = 0.008）。虽然我们的研究没有提供任何因 equipment type（装备类型）导致福利较差的明确证据，但我们对这些发现的普遍性持保留态度，并建议在现实场景中进一步评估这些 leash-walking equipment（遛狗绳装备）。