Sponsor Day on animal feeding: Animal Welfare: definition, assessment and improvement Feed additives, can they improve animal welfare?

Animal Welfare: definition, assessment and improvement

Feed additives,

can they improve animal welfare?

MC Meunier-Salaün

14-16 th may 2014, IRTA Tarragona Seminar on animal feeding

• Animal welfare : central in the issues of animal ethic what are the places of animal within human societies ? Human responsibility towards animals ?

Animal Welfare concept

- a life companion for human (pets)

- a working tool but also a social partner (horse, elephant) - a laboratory model (rodent, farm animal)

- a social economic value (farm animals) - a life component to preserve wild life (natural species)

Status of animal

Representation and perception of human of - their role towards animals - the needs and/or rights of animals

Brambell report (1965) : physical and mental well-being where behaviour is a key signal

Animal Welfare: definitions

Farm Animal Welfare Council (1976)

Freedom from Fear and Distress

Freedom from Hunger and Thirst Freedom from Discomfort Freedom from Pain, Injury or Disease

Freedom to Express Normal Behavior

5 Freedoms

used by legislator for EU standard rules

How the animal welfare is defined in biology ?

the adaptation concept : associated to the effort for the animal to cope to its environment Broom, 1987

the harmony concept: state of complete mental and physical health in which an animal is in harmony with its environment Hughes, 1975; Fraser, 1995, Boissy et al, 2002

Definitions are refering also to

the subjective experience with negative and positive feelings mental representation, emotional and cognitive capacities Duncan et Petherick, 1989, Dawkins, 1990, Boissy et al, 2007

Animal Welfare: definitions

* Repeated events related with negative emotions (fear, pain, frustration), difficulties to cope, physiological abilities of adaptation overloaded

Ideal = harmony = all motivations are fullfilled Welfare

* Events: novelty, unpredictable, impaired expectation -> emotions, coping

Impaired Welfare : chronic stress

Animal Welfare: a continuum

sensibility recognised for animals

subjective state towards the internal/external environment

Whatever the definition

Animal Welfare

complex and multidimensional

Animal Welfare: definition

Step 1/ produce scientific knowledge on behavioural and physiological needs

on the coping strategies

on the human-animal relationships

on the expression and processes involved in the - animal sensibility - sensorial perception, - emotional and cognitive abilities

Animal Welfare assessment

Are they are in good physical and psychological state ?

What do they want ? What are their motivations ? What can they learn ? What are their emotions ?

- to assess the welfare at individual or group level - to evaluate farming practises, to improve or promote new systems respecting the AW

Step 2/ define and validate criteria on animal welfare

Harmony animal –– farmers living conditions / working conditions

Animal Welfare assessment

Multicriteria approach

• Behaviour : budget-time, social relationships, play, comfort behaviour, redirected behaviours (stereotypies, tail biting, featherpecking)

* behaviour

• Stress physiology: HPA, Autonomous Nervous System

* stress physiology

* health

• Health : immune function, disease lameness, cannibalism

• Animal performance : growth, reproduction

* animal performances

Animal Welfare criteria

Ressource-based criteria : housing, livestock practises

Animal-based criteria

CEAV Module Ethologie-Bien-Etre Production Porcine 14-16 Janvier 2014 Nantes ONIRIS

Assessment of welfare inputs and welfare outputs : * inputs being the factors that affect the animal’s welfare : risk factors * outputs being the actual impact of these factors on the animal’s welfare : responses

Animal Welfare assessment Three components (EFSA, 2012)

Use of the Five Freedoms: * Freedom from Hunger and Thirst * Freedom from Discomfort * Freedom to Express Normal Behavior * Freedom from Fear and Distress * Freedom from Pain, Injury or Disease

applications to nutritional issues : use of feed additive ex : impact of feed additive in weaned piglets Dr MC Meunier-Salaün Additives for happier poultry. Dr. Borja Vilà Improving welfare using feed additives. Dr. Maria Devant Use of feed additives for fish health and welfare. Dr. Enric Gisbert

CEAV Module Ethologie-Bien-Etre Production Porcine 14-16 Janvier 2014 Nantes ONIRIS

assessment of welfare inputs and welfare outputs :

Animal welfare assessment Three components (EFSA, 2012) use of the Five Freedoms

Quantification of welfare problems : practical tools for stakeholders (severity, duration of problems, number of animals affected

applications to nutritional issues : use of feed additive example in pigs Additives for happier poultry. Dr. Borja Vilà) Improving welfare using feed additives. Dr. Maria Devant Use of feed additives for fish health and welfare. Dr. Enric Gisbert

Talk “Welfare indicators at farm level” A. Velarde

Application : nutritionnal issues

- limited access to feed or at feeder/drinker * competition within group * body lesions due to agressive interactions * physical constraints for the access

fear and distress

pain, injury, disease

express normal behavior (specie-specific)

- Feeding practises : restriction : unsustained feeding motivation unique diet supply, abrupt dietary transition

discomfort - diet with inapropriate components : unpalatable, low technology and hygienic quality : roughness, contamination, high bulkiness, …

- inappropriate diet to nutritionnal needs - lack of continuous access to water

hunger and thirst

Risk factors Five Freedoms

Behaviour : redirected behaviours (frustration): stereotypies, belly suckling feeding motivation : spontaneous dietary preferences, operant responses agressive behaviour at feeder or drinker (related to feeding competition) Physiology : Stress responses linked to frustration and competition: glucocorticoids, inflammation proteins Health : body lesions related to competitive interactions at feeder or drinker digestive troubles (diarrhea, constipation, ….) Performance : body condition, growth rate

Animal-based

Ressource-based • Dietary supply (Feed component and practises) • Stocking density (related to feeder access) • Equipment : Feeder - Drinker (type, number) • Temperature • Environmental enrichment : fibrous substrate

Assessment of Animal Welfare : criteria Application : nutritionnal issues

nutritional changes: inadequate feeding behaviour => digestive disorders, growth depressed

hunger and thirst

mixing unfamiliar conspecifics social stress agressive interactions : body lesions

fear and distress

pain, injury, disease

express normal behavior (specie-specific)

early breakdown of the mother-young bond : accelerated weaning process

discomfort - housing overcrowding : limited feeder access - diet with inapropriate components : unpalatable, low technology and hygienic quality: digestive disorders

Risk factors related to weaning Five Freedoms

Application: Feeding transition in weaned piglets

Application: Feeding transition in weaned piglets

How to improve the welfare state in nutritionnal issue ?

increase the feeding motivation

previous experience : habituation to new diet, improve transition weaning diet : more palatable , preferred by piglets

Use of feed additive

feeding motivation promoted by adjunction of

sensorial additive ingredients in the weaning diet

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets

studies on experimental diets with sensory functional ingredients (i.e. phytogenic products) Clouard et al, 2012, 2014

1/ preference towards various nuclei ? nuclei from essential oils, plant extracts or flavouring compounds : stevia, citrus, hot-flavoured spices, cinnamom, camphor, star anise, aromatic analdehyde…

Paradigms

2/ impact of concentration of the additive component

3/ impact at short and long term

key points for methodology to assess the impact of feed additive on AW

- impact on feeding motivation (hedonic effect) and performance - factors of variation involved in the effects of the feed additive

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets

• preference during two-choice feeding tests - between diets with or without additive components - during various time duration: 30 min- meal test, one hour or 22 hours

Criteria

feeding motivation promoted by adjunction of sensorial additive ingredients in the weaning diet

Feeding motivation :

• feed consumption during a one-way test (30 min-meal test) during the postweaning period

Growth performance

Health

Food consumed, % total intake N+C

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets

no significant preference N-C : N1 stevia and saponin 3.7ml/kg N3 hot-flavoured spice 0.045 ml/kg N4 aromatic aldhehyde and MCFA 0.58 ml/kg

(Clouard et al, 2012)

1/ preference towards various nuclei : essential oils, plant extracts or flavouring compounds (stevia, citrus, hot-flavoured spices, cinnamom, camphor, star anise, …) Concentration : 0.02 to 3.7 mg/kg diet, dilution water/oil

two-choice feeding tests : 30 min meal between Nn and control (C) diets

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets

three two-choice tests : - avoidance of N2B - high and stable consumption with N1 - increasing consumption with N3.

two-choice feeding tests : 30 min meal between « additive » diets

N1 Stevia and saponin (3.7ml/kg), N2B orange (0.03 ml/kg) N3 hot-flavoured spices (0.45 ml/kg), N4 aromatic aldhehyde and MCFA (0.58 ml/kg),

(Clouard et al, 2013)

Food consumed, % total intake N-N

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets 2/ impact of concentration of additive ingredient

two-choice feeding tests : 30 min meal, diet with extract of orange

Preference depends on the incorporation rate of the additive from welfare point of view : attraction emotion > 0 aversion emotion < 0

not prefered

N2B N1 (stevia) vs

N3 (hot-flavoured spice)

N4 (aromatic aldhehyde & MCFA)

(Clouard et al, 2012)

N2 N2A 0,12 ml/kg

High concentration : stronger aversion

N2B 0,03 ml/kg

vs control (C) diets

feed intake and growth performance over the whole period : no effect

(Clouard et al, 2012)

N1 enable to maintain a normal consumption just after the transition

N1 N3

Day 9 – Day 10 C

Nuclei tested : N1 stevia and saponin 3,7ml/kg, N3 hot-flavour spice 0,045 ml/kg)

additive ingredient to weaning diet may potentially enhance the welfare by improving the feeding transition

3/ impact of additive ingredients over time

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets

32 females 8,32 ± 0,15 kg

Individual pen

Criteria : Feeding preference : two-choice test : Fan vs T 3 sessions : day 6 - 23 – 26 Short term : 1H test (9-10h) long term : 22H test (11- 9h following day) measure : % feed intake (Fn) / total feed intake (Fn+T) Performance : growth and feed intake during the post- weaning period

Clouard et al, 2014

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets 3/ impact of additive ingredients over time

Ad Lib 1er- 2sd âge

Weaning

Transition

T 1 26 16 23 28 7 14 21 Days

diet 1er age FA1 diet 2ème age FA1 diet 1er age FA2 diet 2ème age FA2

diet 1er age T diet 2ème age T diet 1er age FA3 diet 2ème age FA3

Incorporation: FA1: 0,4%; FA2 : 0,003125% ; FA3 : 0,0405% in a wheat matrix (10 kg/t)

Feeding preference two-choice test

Palatabilité :

1h- test

** *

0

200

400

600

800

D23 D16 D26

22h- Test

FA2 > C stronger at long term

FA2 vs C

0

25

50

75

100

125

†

0

200

400

600

800

D23 D16 D26

FA3 > C only after 10 days after transition

0

25

50

75

100

125

* FA3 vs C

Example : Feeding transition in weaned piglets

Feed intake - growth performance during the weaning period not affected

• Variation in biological responses according to characteristices of animal : age, sex, breed emotional state: stressful responses to novelty cognitive abilities : learning / coping strategy ressources : source of nutritionnal components, feeding practises, social context (competition or social facilitation)

CONCLUSIONS

How to take into account the Animal Welfare concept in nutritionnal issues

• Keep in mind that the assessment of animal welfare needs a multicriteria approach : animal-based & ressources based criteria

• Identify the risk factors related to housing and feeding practises which can interact with the nutritional treatment tested : importance for the interpretation of results and their application to various contexts

CONCLUSIONS Feed additives, can they improve animal welfare ?

Feed additives may potentially

* promote the feeding motivation * help animals in feeding transitions linked to novel feed or

changes in feeding and housing practises

==> positive effect on performance and health improvement of animal welfare

to components : sources, concentration in diet to time schedule : short, mid, long term

But effects vary according

cautions in interpretation of data using experimental paradigms

* multichoice test : preference relative rather than absolute * one-way with unique diet : individual variation, impact of satiety state * group context vs individual : social facilitation process or feeding competition context which can modulate individual preferences or responses

CONCLUSIONS Feed additives, can they improve animal welfare?

Experimental paradigms to assess feeding motivation, preference/aversion

Operant conditionning paradigm: the animals need to work to obtain a food reward / access to diet

previous learning needed to use the design work required can modulate the intensity of responses

Ordinateur

Choice test:

CONCLUSIONS

Applications to other species : next talks Poultry: Dr. Borja Vilà Ruminant: Dr. Maria Devant Fish: Dr. Enric Gisbert

Feed additives, can they improve animal welfare?

Thanks for your attention