Increasing societal and customer pressure to provide animals with ‘a life worth living’ continues to apply pressure on livestock production industries to alleviate pain associated with husbandry practices, injury and illness. Over the past 15–20 years, there has been considerable research effort to understand and develop mitigation strategies for painful husbandry procedures in sheep, leading to the successful launch of analgesic approaches specific to sheep in a number of countries. However, even with multi-modal approaches to analgesia, using both local anaesthetic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), pain is not obliterated, and the challenge of pain mitigation and phasing out of painful husbandry practices remains. It is timely to review and reflect on progress to date in order to strategically focus on the most important challenges, and the avenues which offer the greatest potential to be incorporated into industry practice in a process of continuous improvement. A structured, systematic literature search was carried out, incorporating peer-reviewed scientific literature in the period 2000–2019. An enormous volume of research is underway, testament to the fact that we have not solved the pain and analgesia challenge for any species, including our own. This review has highlighted a number of potential areas for further research.

When an individual attends to certain types of information more than others, the behavior is termed an attention bias. The occurrence of attention biases in humans and animals can depend on their affective states. Based on evidence from the human literature and prior studies in sheep, we hypothesized that an attention bias test could discriminate between pharmacologically-induced positive and negative affective states in sheep. The test measured allocation of attention between a threat and a positive stimulus using key measures of looking time and vigilance. Eighty 7-year-old Merino ewes were allocated to one of four treatment groups; Anxious (m-chlorophenylpiperazine), Calm (diazepam), Happy (morphine) and Control (saline). Drugs were administered 30 min prior to attention bias testing. The test was conducted in a 4 × 4.2 m arena with high opaque walls. An approximately life-size photograph of a sheep was positioned on one wall of the arena (positive stimulus). A small window with a retractable opaque cover was positioned on the opposite wall, behind which a dog was standing quietly (threat). The dog was visible for 3 s after a single sheep entered the arena, then the window was covered and the dog was removed. Sheep then remained in the arena for 3 min while behaviors were recorded. Key behaviors included time looking toward the dog wall or photo wall, duration of vigilance behavior and latency to become non-vigilant. In contrast with our hypothesis, no significant differences were found between treatment groups for duration of vigilance or looking behaviors, although Anxious sheep tended to be more vigilant than Control animals (P < 0.1) and had a longer latency to become non-vigilant (P < 0.001). A total of 24 of 80 animals were vigilant for the entire test duration. This censoring of data may explain why no differences were detected between groups for vigilance duration. Overall, a lack of difference between groups may suggest the test cannot discriminate positive and negative states in sheep. We suggest that the censoring of vigilance duration data, the use of insufficient drug doses, the potential influence of background noise and the age of the sheep may explain a lack of difference between groups. Due to these potential effects, it remains unclear whether the attention bias test can detect positive states in sheep.

Selection for production traits with little or no emphasis on health-related traits has the potential to increase susceptibility to disease in food-producing animals. A possible genetic strategy to mitigate such effects is to include both production and health traits in the breeding objective when selecting animals. For this to occur, reliable methodologies are required to assess beneficial health traits, such as the immune capacity of animals. We describe here a methodology to assess the immune competence of beef cattle which is both practical to apply on farm and does not restrict the future sale of tested animals. The methodology also accommodates variation in prior vaccination history of cohorts of animals being tested. In the present study, the immune competence phenotype of 1,100 Angus calves was assessed during yard weaning. Genetic parameters associated with immune competence traits were estimated and associations between immune competence, temperament, and stress-coping ability traits were investigated. Results suggested that immune competence traits, related to an animal’s ability to mount both antibody and cell-mediated immune responses, are moderately heritable (h2 = 0.32 ± 0.09 and 0.27 ± 0.08, respectively) and favorably genetically correlated with the temperament trait, flight time (r = 0.63 ± 0.31 and 0.60 ± 0.29 with antibody and cell-mediated immune responses, respectively). Development of methodologies to assess the immune competence phenotype of beef cattle is a critical first step in the establishment of genetic selection strategies aimed at improving the general disease resistance of beef herds. Strategies aimed at reducing the incidence of disease in beef cattle are expected to significantly improve animal health and welfare, reduce reliance on the use of antibiotics to treat disease, and reduce disease-associated costs incurred by producers.