Trained-user opinion about Welfare Quality® measures and integrated scoring of dairy cattle welfare
MetadataShow full item record
The Welfare Quality® (WQ) protocol for on-farm dairy cattle welfare assessment describes 27 measures and a step-wise method to integrate values for these measures into 12 criteria scores, grouped further into four principle scores and finally into an overall welfare categorization with four levels. We conducted an online survey to examine whether trained users’ opinions of the WQ protocol for dairy cattle correspond with the integrated scores (criteria, principles and overall categorization) calculated according to the WQ protocol. First, the trained users’ scores (n = 8 - 15) for reliability, validity and their ranking of the importance of all measures for herd welfare were compared to the degree of actual impact of these measures on the WQ integrated scores. Logistic regression was applied to identify the measures that affected the WQ overall welfare categorization into the ‘not classified’ or ‘enhanced’ categories for a database of 491 European herds. The smallest multivariate model whilst maintaining the highest % of both sensitivity and specificity for the ‘enhanced’ category contained six measures, the model for not-classified contained four measures. Some of the measures that were ranked as least important by trained users (e.g. measures relating to drinkers) had the highest influence on the WQ overall welfare categorization. Conversely, measures rated as most important by the trained users (e.g. lameness and mortality) had a lower impact on the WQ overall category. In addition, trained users were asked to allocate ‘criterion’ and ‘overall’ welfare scores to seven focal herds selected from the database (n = 491 herds). Data on all WQ measures for these focal herds relative to all other herds in the database were provided. The degree to which expert scores corresponded to each other, the systematic difference and the correspondence between median trained-user opinion and the WQ criterion scores were then tested. The level of correspondence between expert scoring vs. WQ scoring for 6 of the 12 criteria and for the overall welfare score was low. The WQ scores of the protocol for dairy cattle thus lacked correspondence with trained users on the importance of several welfare measures.
Journal Title/Title of Proceedings
Journal of Dairy Science
Copyright © American Dairy Science Association®, 2017. This manuscript version is made available after the end of the 12 month embargo period under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Copyright © American Dairy Science Association®, 2017. This manuscript version is made available after the end of the 12 month embargo period under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.
Wemelsfelder F; Mullan S (2014)There is a growing effort worldwide to develop objective indicators for animal welfare assessment, which provide information on an animal’s quality of life, are scientifically trustworthy, and can readily be used in ...
Projected effect of alternative management strategies on profit and animal welfare in extensive sheep production systems in Great Britain Stott AW; Milne CE; Goddard PJ; Waterhouse A (2005)
Wemelsfelder F; Nevison I; Lawrence AB (2009)Qualitative behaviour assessment is an integrative methodology that characterizes behaviour as a dynamic, expressive body language (e.g. as anxious or content). Such assessments are sensitive to environmental context, which ...