| |
Records |
Links |
|
Author  |
McGreevy, P.; Berger, J.; De Brauwere, N.; Doherty, O.; Harrison, A.; Fiedler, J.; Jones, C.; McDonnell, S.; McLean, A.; Nakonechny, L.; Nicol, C.; Preshaw, L.; Thomson, P.; Tzioumis, V.; Webster, J.; Wolfensohn, S.; Yeates, J.; Jones, B |
|
| |
Title |
Using the Five Domains Model to Assess the Adverse Impacts of Husbandry, Veterinary, and Equitation Interventions on Horse Welfare. |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2018 |
Publication |
Animals |
Abbreviated Journal |
Animals |
|
| |
Volume |
8 |
Issue |
3 |
Pages |
41 |
|
| |
Keywords |
horse; welfare assessment; equitation; husbandry; five domains |
|
| |
Abstract |
The aim of this study was to conduct a series of paper-based exercises in order to assess the negative (adverse) welfare impacts, if any, of common interventions on domestic horses across a broad range of different contexts of equine care and training. An international panel (with professional expertise in psychology, equitation science, veterinary science, education, welfare, equestrian coaching, advocacy, and community engagement; n = 16) met over a four-day period to define and assess these interventions, using an adaptation of the domain-based assessment model. The interventions were considered within 14 contexts: C1 Weaning; C2 Diet; C3 Housing; C4 Foundation training; C5 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly medical); C6 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly surgical); C7 Elective procedures; C8 Care procedures; C9 Restraint for management procedures; C10 Road transport; C11 Activity—competition; C12 Activity—work; C13 Activity—breeding females; and C14 Activity—breeding males. Scores on a 1–10 scale for Domain 5 (the mental domain) gathered during the workshop were compared with overall impact scores on a 1–10 scale assigned by the same panellists individually before the workshop. The most severe (median and interquartile range, IQR) impacts within each context were identified during the workshop as: C1 abrupt, individual weaning (10 IQR 1); C2 feeding 100% low-energy concentrate (8 IQR 2.5); C3 indoor tie stalls with no social contact (9 IQR 1.5); C4 both (i) dropping horse with ropes (9 IQR 0.5) and forced flexion (9 IQR 0.5); C5 long-term curative medical treatments (8 IQR 3); C6 major deep intracavity surgery (8.5 IQR 1); C7 castration without veterinary supervision (10 IQR 1); C8 both (i) tongue ties (8 IQR 2.5) and (ii) restrictive nosebands (8 IQR 2.5); C9 ear twitch (8 IQR 1); C10 both (i) individual transport (7.00 IQR 1.5) and group transport with unfamiliar companions (7 IQR 1.5); C11 both (i) jumps racing (8 IQR 2.5) and Western performance (8 IQR 1.5); C12 carriage and haulage work (6 IQR 1.5); C13 wet nurse during transition between foals (7.5 IQR 3.75); and C14 teaser horse (7 IQR 8). Associations between pre-workshop and workshop scores were high, but some rankings changed after workshop participation, particularly relating to breeding practices. Domain 1 had the weakest association with Domain 5. The current article discusses the use of the domain-based model in equine welfare assessment, and offers a series of assumptions within each context that future users of the same approach may make when assessing animal welfare under the categories reported here. It also discusses some limitations in the framework that was used to apply the model. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ |
Serial |
6606 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
McGreevy, P.D.; Thomson, P.C. |
|
| |
Title |
Differences in motor laterality between breeds of performance horse |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2006 |
Publication |
Applied Animal Behaviour Science |
Abbreviated Journal |
Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. |
|
| |
Volume |
99 |
Issue |
1-2 |
Pages |
183-190 |
|
| |
Keywords |
Horse; Lateralisation; Laterality; Breed; Training |
|
| |
Abstract |
This study examined the relationship between motor laterality in horses bred for different types of work and therefore different temperaments. Foreleg preference during grazing was measured in three populations of domestic horse, Thoroughbreds (TB, bred to race at the gallop), Standardbreds (SB, bred for pacing) and Quarter Horses (QH, in this case bred for so-called “cutting work” which involves manoeuvring individual cattle in and out of herds). With a one-sample t-test, TBs showed strong evidence of a left preference in motor laterality (P = 0.000), as did SBs (P = 0.002) but there was no convincing evidence for laterality in QH (P = 0.117). However, the increasing trend in left preference from QH to SBs then TBs was associated with increasing differences between individual horses within a breed. The overall preference (either left or right) increased with age (P = 0.008) and the rate of increase varied with breeds. The presence of a higher proportion of left-foreleg preferent individuals in TBs and SBs compared with QH may indicate that their training or selection (or both) has an effect on motor bias. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
|
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
|
Serial |
1828 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
| |
|
| |
|
Author |
Tomkins, L.M.; Williams, K.A.; Thomson, P.C.; McGreevy, P.D. |
|
| |
Title |
Sensory Jump Test as a measure of sensory (visual) lateralization in dogs (Canis familiaris) |
Type |
Journal Article |
| |
Year |
2010 |
Publication |
Journal of Veterinary Behavior |
Abbreviated Journal |
|
|
| |
Volume |
5 |
Issue |
5 |
Pages |
256-267 |
|
| |
Keywords |
sensory lateralization; monocular vision; binocular vision; jump kinematics; dog |
|
| |
Abstract |
Sensory lateralization in dogs (n = 74) was investigated in this study using our innovation, the Sensory Jump Test. This required the modification of head halters to create three different ocular treatments (binocular, right, and left monocular vision) for eye preference assessment in a jumping task. Ten jumps were recorded as a jump set for each treatment. Measurements recorded included (i) launch and landing paws, (ii) type of jump, (iii) approach distance, (iv) clearance height of the forepaw, hindpaw, and the lowest part of the body to clear the jump, and (v) whether the jump was successful. Factors significantly associated with these jump outcomes included ocular treatment, jump set number, and replication number. Most notably, in the first jump set, findings indicated a left hemispheric dominance for the initial navigation of the Sensory Jump Test, as left monocular vision (LMV) compromised of jumping more than right monocular (RMV) and binocular vision, with a significantly reduced approach distance and forepaw clearance observed in dogs with LMV. However, by the third jump set, dogs undergoing LMV launched from a greater approach distance and with a higher clearance height, corresponding to an increase in success rate of the jump, in comparison with RMV and binocular vision dogs. A marginally non-significant RMV bias was observed for eye preference based on the laterality indices for approach distance (P = 0.060) and lowest body part clearance height (P = 0.067). A comparison between eye preference and launching or landing paws showed no association between these measures of sensory and motor laterality. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report on sensory lateralization in the dog, and furthermore, to compare both motor and sensory laterality in dogs. |
|
| |
Address |
|
|
| |
Corporate Author |
|
Thesis |
|
|
| |
Publisher |
|
Place of Publication |
|
Editor |
|
|
| |
Language |
|
Summary Language |
|
Original Title |
|
|
| |
Series Editor |
|
Series Title |
|
Abbreviated Series Title |
|
|
| |
Series Volume |
|
Series Issue |
|
Edition |
|
|
| |
ISSN |
1558-7878 |
ISBN |
|
Medium |
|
|
| |
Area |
|
Expedition |
|
Conference |
|
|
| |
Notes |
|
Approved |
no |
|
| |
Call Number |
Equine Behaviour @ team @ S1558-7878(10)00019-5 |
Serial |
5379 |
|
| Permanent link to this record |
