On-farm welfare assessment in meat goat does raised in semi-intensive and extensive systems in semiarid regions of Ceará, Northeast, Brazil

Leite, Luana Oliveira; Stamm, Fabiana de Orte; Maceno, Marcelo Adriano Corrêa; Camarinha Filho, Jomar Antonio; Garcia, Rita de Cassia Maria

doi:10.1590/0103-8478cr20190745

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ANIMAL PRODUCTION • Cienc. Rural 50 (10) • 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20190745 copy

On-farm welfare assessment in meat goat does raised in semi-intensive and extensive systems in semiarid regions of Ceará, Northeast, Brazil

Avaliação do bem-estar em fazendas de cabras de corte criadas em sistemas semi-intensivo e extensivo em regiões semiáridas do Ceará, Nordeste, Brasil

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT:

The aim of this study was to apply a protocol based on the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) protocols for small ruminants in Brazilian Northeast farms to evaluate the welfare of meat goat, comparing animals kept on semi-intensive (S) and extensive (E) farms. Fifteen farms located in the Metropolitan Region of Quixadá and Quixeramobim, Ceará, Brazilian Northeast, were recruited. Assessments were performed at group and individual level. Significant differences between S and E farms was set at P<0.05 to all tests. At group level, there was a significant difference between groups, with more goats from E farms affected by heat stress and more animals from S farms presenting oblivion. Resource-based indicators, type of drinkers and access to shelter, differed significantly between S and E systems, with goats on S farms allocated in places with access to water more frequently during night period and protected from wind. Type of facility was more complex for animals on S farms (n=2) than on all E farms due to internal divisions, with S farms presenting feeders, drinking fountains, salt shakers, and slatted or cemented floor. At individual level, abscess and ocular discharge were more frequently observed on S farms and ears lesions were more frequent on E farms, probably due to distinct management of goats. Similarities between results showed that farmers in both production systems faced problems related to heat stress, lack of forage and health issues.

Key words:
animal welfare; AWIN protocol; production system; human-animal relationship; physiological indicators

Universidade Federal de Santa Maria Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Centro de Ciências Rurais , 97105-900 Santa Maria RS Brazil , Tel.: +55 55 3220-8698 , Fax: +55 55 3220-8695 - Santa Maria - RS - Brazil
E-mail: cienciarural@mail.ufsm.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] E-mail: luanaoliv.vet@gmail.com. ^*Corresponding author

Farm	Production system (Semi intensive -S; Extensive - E)	Number of goat does	First welfare level (group 1)	First welfare level (group 2)	Second welfare Level (individual)
Farm 01	S	107	31	0	47
Farm 02	S	346	19	19	56
Farm 03	S	14	14	0	14
Farm 04	S	18	18		18
Farm 05	S	18	18	0	16
Farm 06	E	18	18	0	18
Farm 07	E	30	30	0	22
Farm 08	E	7	7	0	7
Farm 09	E	44	44	0	26
Farm 10	E	13	13	0	13
Farm 11	E	27	27	0	19
Farm 12	E	22	22	0	16
Farm 13	E	50	50	0	29
Farm 14	E	17	17	0	17
Farm 15	E	36	36	0	26

Indicator	Description
^aOblivion^H	The number of goats physically or mentally isolated from the group is recorded.
^aThermal stress^H	Number of goats showing heat (high accelerate respiration rate) or cold (shivering or presence of bristly hair) stress signs is counted.
^aFaecal soiling^H	The presence of soft and liquid manure below the tail head is visually assessed as a sign of diarrhea.
^aHair coat condition^H	The number of goats presenting poor hair coat (defined as matted, rough, scurfy, uneven, shaggy hair coat frequently longer than normal) is recorded.
^bLameness score^H Score 0 Score 1 Score 2 Score 3	Goats are moved into the fenced fields and the number of lame animals is recorded. Not lame. Goat’s weight is borne on all four feet. Head nodding is perceived or the limb is rapidly lifted when touches the ground Obvious head nodding is perceived; foot may be held-up whilst standing; goats may be grazing on knees. Goat is lying down and do not move. Animal is reluctant to stand or move.
^bFamiliar Human Approach Test(FHAT)^HAR	The closest distance (m) of approach the group, before a flight response is evoke, is recorded. If an animal stands motionless, this is recorded as 0 m. Animals that approach voluntary and/or interact (sniffing or touching) are also recorded.
^dStocking density^R Good Adequate Poor	The size of pen/housing dimensions (m²) is recorded and divided for the number of goats inside. Goats have, at least, 2m² each. Goats have at least 1.51m² but less than 2m². Goats have 1.5m² or less.
^bAccess to shade and shelter^R	The presence of shade and shelter is recorded.
^bWater availability^R Presence and type Functioning Cleanliness	The number and type of water point (bucket, automatic drinker and natural water source) is recorded. Presence of water and type of drinkers. Check if the water point is functioning. Dirty (water and water points are dirty; natural water source are stagnant or polluted); Partially dirty (water points are dirty but the water is clean); Clean (water and water points are clean; natural water source are clean and unpolluted).
^cFacility^R Type of facility Type of floor Cleanliness	Type of facility and floor, besides the cleanliness of the installations, were recorded. Classification of facility: goat houses rustic facilities. Classification of floor: bare soil, cement, cement with bare soil,suspended slatted floor or suspended slatted floor with a sun area with bare soil. Dirty (The floor was covered with faeces in more than 75% of the area); Partially dirty (the floor was covered with faeces in an area between 25 and 75% of the floor); Clean (The floor was covered with faeces in less than 25% of the area).

Indicator	Description
Body Condition Score (BCS)	BCS is asses using a five-level (1-5) scoring method (VILAQUIRAN et al., 2004).
^aFaecal soiling	The presence of soft and liquid manure below the tail head is visually assessed as a sign of diarrhea.The assessment is done in the same way as at the first level of welfare.
^aAbscess	The presence of external abscesses in front area is recorded.
^aNasal discharge	The presence of any mucous or purulent discharge from the nose is visually assessed.
^aOcular discharge	The presence of clearly visible flow from one or two eyes is visually assessed.
^b Vulvar discharge	The presence of any mucous, purulent or sanguineous discharge from the vulva is visually assessed.
^cRespiration quality	The presence of obvious effort on inspiration, persistent coughing and audible breath sounds is recorded.
^dLesions on head, body and udder teats No lesions Minor Major	The presence of lesions is recorded, with or without myiasis (presence of maggots on animal). No evidence of lesions in all these parts. Lesions type (scratches, healed, open wounds, ear notches) that are greater than 2cm and less than 10cm, without blood. Wounds greater than 10 cm, opened, and that reach or not the muscle layer.Ear cuts, already healed, greater than 10 cm.

Animal health-based indicators	Number (%)		Number (%)		P-value
	Goats	S groups	Goats	E groups
Oblivion	5 (4.20)	2 (33.33)	1 (0.37)	1 (10.0)	0.012^*
Thermal stress	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	11 (4.16)	3 (30.0)	0.021^*
Faecal soiling	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	-
Hair coat condition	10 (8.40)	3 (50.0)	32 (12.12)	8 (80.0)	0.245
Minor lameness	2 (1.68)	2 (33.33)	1 (0.37)	1(10.0)	0.228
Lame	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	3 (1.13)	3 (30.0)	0.555
Severely lameness	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	-

Farms	Production system	Number of drinkers	Type of drinkers	Cleanliness of drinkers	Stocking density (m²)
Farm 01	Semi-intensive	2	Automathic drinker	Dirty	-
Farm 02 (Group 01)	Semi-intensive	1	Automathic drinker	Clean	8.25
Farm 02 (Group 2)	Semi-intensive	1	Automathic drinker	Partially dirty	8.25
Farm 03	Semi-intensive	1	Automathic drinker	Dirty	11.81
Farm 04	Semi-intensive	2	¹Bucket/ ²Automathic drinker	¹Dirty/ ²Clean	3.33
Farm 05	Semi-intensive	2	Bucket	Partially dirty	6.76
Farm 06	Extensive	1	Lake	Clean	4.85
Farm 07	Extensive	3	¹Bucket/ ²Lake	¹Dirty/ ²Clean	5.82
Farm 08	Extensive	1	Bucket	Dirty	7.87
Farm 09	Extensive	1	Lake	Clean	3.2
Farm 10	Extensive	2	¹Bucket/ ²Lake	¹Partially dirty/ ²Clean	6.4
Farm 11	Extensive	3	Bucket	Partially dirty	5.56
Farm 12	Extensive	2	¹Bucket/ ²Bucket	¹Clean/ ²Partially dirty	2.28
Farm 13	Extensive	1	Lake	Clean	2.12
Farm 14	Extensive	1	Lake	Clean	-
Farm 15	Extensive	6	Bucket	Partially dirty	-

Animal health Indicators	Number (%)		Number (%)		P-valor
	Goats	S farms	Goats	E farms
Faecal soiling	5 (3.31)	3 (60.0)	6 (3.10)	4 (40.0)	1.000
Abscess	25 (16.55)	4 (80.0)	19 (9.84)	7 (70.0)	0.044^*
Nasal discharge	11 (7.28)	2 (40.0)	8 (4.14)	6 (60.0)	0.206
Ocular discharge	24 (15.89)	4 (80.0)	16 (8.29)	4 (40.0)	0.029^*
Vulvar discharge	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	2 (1.03)	2 (20.0)	0.506
Respiration quality	1 (0.66)	1 (20.0)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)	1.000