No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Abstract. One hundred and twenty Bos indicus cross steers were allocated to 3 treatments (good, mixed and poor) on the basis of flight speed, as a measure of cattle temperament. The cattle were lot-fed for 100 days and data collected at intervals on their temperament (flight speeds) and productivity (liveweight changes, body condition, pen feed intakes) during this time. After slaughter, data were collected on carcass traits and meat quality. Eating-quality attributes were measured in meat samples from 22 carcasses from each treatment.Flight speeds were highly correlated across animals and within treatments, showed little change in variability over time and were highly repeatable. Flight speed indicated a slight deterioration in temperament with time in the feedlot until day 70, suggesting an increasing fearfulness in the steers. Differences in flight speeds between treatments were maintained throughout the feedlotting period; poor-temperament animals retained poor temperaments and good retained good.Flight speed was correlated with measures of production, and flight speed measured at feedlot induction was a predictor of performance. Correlations and treatment effects showed that cattle with poor temperaments had poorer average daily gains, feed conversion efficiencies, body conditions and dressing percentages compared with those with good temperaments. Reduced performance in the poor-temperament animals may have resulted from their fearfulness and state of high arousal.Treatment (temperament grouping) did not influence carcass traits, but there was evidence of lower initial pH levels and indicators of 'heat-shortening' in the meat of steers with poor temperament compared with those with good temperament. These findings suggest that the poor temperament steers were more susceptible to pre-slaughter stressors than the good temperament animals. However, the meat quality differences were not detected in eating-quality measurements.

No abstract

In general, codes that have been designed to safeguard the welfare of animals emphasize the importance of providing an environment that will ensure good health and a normal physiological and physical state, that is, they emphasize the animals' physical needs. If mental needs are mentioned, they are always relegated to secondary importance. The argument is put forward here that animal welfare is dependent solely on the cognitive needs of the animals concerned. In general, if these cognitive needs are met, they will protect the animals' physical needs. It is contended that in the few cases in which they do not safeguard the physical needs, it does not matter from a welfare point of view. The human example is given of being ill. It is argued that welfare is only adversely affected when a person feels ill, knows that he or she is ill, or even thinks that he or she is ill, all of which processes are cognitive ones. The implications for welfare of animals possessing certain cognitive abilities are discussed. For example, the extent to which animals are aware of their internal state while performing behavior known to be indicative of so-called states of suffering, such as fear, frustration, and pain, will determine how much they are actually suffering. With careful experimentation it may be possible to determine how negative they feel these states to be. Similarly, the extent to which animals think about items or events absent from their immediate environment will determine how frustrated they are in the absence of the real item or event but in the presence of the cognitive representation.

No abstract

No abstract