Rating of animal welfare in Marchigiana beef farms in Marche Region

被引:0
作者
Mandolini, N. Aconiti [1 ]
Moscati, L. [1 ]
Dettori, A. [1 ]
Felici, A. [1 ]
Corradini, C. M.
Tirabasso, V.
Marzialetti, A.
Perugini, G. [1 ]
Maresca, C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Ist Zooprofilatt Sperimentale Umbria & Marche, Pesaro, Italy
来源
LARGE ANIMAL REVIEW | 2017年 / 23卷 / 01期
关键词
Animal welfare; farm's management; innate immunity parameters; SERUM;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
S8 [畜牧、 动物医学、狩猎、蚕、蜂];
学科分类号
0905 ;
摘要
Introduction - The breeding of Marchigiana cattle breed in the Marche Region, still plays a very important role in the rural realities of the region. In recent decades the methods of breeding of this breed have changed significantly and today, in addition to family farms, there are actually farms of considerable size, which breed this cattle intensively. Aim - It has gone from this variability to investigate any differences between the management of these farms and the level of animal welfare inside them . Material and methods - This aim was reached giving a questionnaire to the breeders of 36 farms asking them to clinical and health aspects, managerial and structural aspects, and the drug management. To each question was assigned a score from 1 to 3. At the same time, blood samples were performed on 270 calves under 6 months of age to evaluate some non-specific immune parameters (serum- amyloid A, haptoglobin, serum lysozyme, complement and bactericidal activities of serum). Results and discussion - According to our classification 15 farms were considered to have good management, 15 an intermediate level of management and 6 mismanagement. The questionnaire also showed that 22 out of 36 companies do not carry out quarantine, only 6 companies make annual checks on the herd even without symptoms. The 67% of farms (n. 24) has reproductive problems, among which the most frequently turns out to be a return to heat (87%). Only 3 companies make use of advice from a nutritionist and only 4 have made the last three therapies based on a complete diagnosis (clinical diagnosis and direct diagnosis of laboratory). It was observed statistically significant association (OR = 3.1; 95% CI 1.6 to 6; p=0.01) between the number of animals in a farm, the enteric diseases and mortality in calves under six months. In companies with a number = 80 of cattle units, the calves had a 3 times greater probability of developing intestinal disease or to die. Regarding the innate immunity parameters we can say that there is no difference between the values registered in the farms with a better or worse management. Conclusions - This shows that despite the selective pressure to which the Marchigiana cattle breed has undergone in the last decade, this bovine still keeps its rustic character that make it suitable to be breed also in the reality in which bacterial and viral loads are particularly high.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 10
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Relationship between behavioral indicators of animal welfare and physicochemical properties of beef
    Quispe, Hurley
    Cayo-Colea, Ilse
    Saucedo, Jose
    REVISTA DE INVESTIGACIONES VETERINARIAS DEL PERU, 2019, 30 (01): : 34 - 48
  • [22] Animal Welfare Investigation of Akkaraman Sheep Farms in Different Provinces of Türkiye
    Sakar, Cagri Meliksah
    Koncagul, Seyrani
    Artut, Burak
    Aydin, Adil Akin
    Unal, Ilker
    Ozdemir, Arzu
    Unay, Engin
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE, 2024,
  • [23] Animal health and welfare state and technical efficiency of dairy farms: possible synergies
    Tremetsberger, L.
    Winckler, C.
    Kantelhardt, J.
    ANIMAL WELFARE, 2019, 28 (03) : 345 - 352
  • [24] Antibiotic Use in Alpine Dairy Farms and Its Relation to Biosecurity and Animal Welfare
    Menegon, Francesca
    Capello, Katia
    Tarakdjian, Jacopo
    Pasqualin, Dario
    Cunial, Giovanni
    Andreatta, Sara
    Dellamaria, Debora
    Manca, Grazia
    Farina, Giovanni
    Di Martino, Guido
    ANTIBIOTICS-BASEL, 2022, 11 (02):
  • [25] Global Animal Partnership's 5-Step™ Animal Welfare Rating Standards: a welfare-labelling scheme that allows for continuous improvement
    Duncan, I. J. H.
    Park, M.
    Malleau, A. E.
    ANIMAL WELFARE, 2012, 21 : 113 - 116
  • [26] Animal Welfare and Farmers' Satisfaction in Small-Scale Dairy Farms in the Eastern Alps: A "One Welfare" Approach
    Spigarelli, Chiara
    Berton, Marco
    Corazzin, Mirco
    Gallo, Luigi
    Pinterits, Sabine
    Ramanzin, Maurizio
    Ressi, Wolfgang
    Sturaro, Enrico
    Zuliani, Anna
    Bovolenta, Stefano
    FRONTIERS IN VETERINARY SCIENCE, 2021, 8
  • [27] Out-wintering pads for finishing beef cattle: animal production and welfare
    Hickey, MC
    French, P
    Grant, J
    ANIMAL SCIENCE, 2002, 75 : 447 - 458
  • [28] Rating harms to wildlife: a survey showing convergence between conservation and animal welfare views
    Dubois, S.
    Fraser, D.
    ANIMAL WELFARE, 2013, 22 (01) : 49 - 55
  • [29] Building 'cowshed cultures': A cultural perspective on the promotion of stockmanship and animal welfare on dairy farms
    Burton, Rob J. F.
    Peoples, Sue
    Cooper, Mark H.
    JOURNAL OF RURAL STUDIES, 2012, 28 (02) : 174 - 187
  • [30] The representativeness of a semi-random sampling method for animal welfare assessments on mink farms
    Marsboll, A. F.
    Henriksen, B. I. F.
    Moller, S. H.
    ANIMAL WELFARE, 2019, 28 (03) : 307 - 315