Measuring on-farm welfare in rabbits
Abstract
According to modern definitions, animal welfare should be associated with a life that animals believe is worth living, through positive experiences, not just the absence of negative ones. Determining animal welfare on a farm is crucial for improving farming systems, identifying critical points and comparing different farming systems with regard to welfare labeling protocols (a list of indicators that indicate welfare). To this end, species-specific protocols are needed, which should use different types of indicators, i.e. resource-based indicators, management-based indicators, and especially animal-based indicators. These indicators should work in different farming systems and for different categories of animals and can be used to assess welfare in the short term or over the productive life of the animal. Last but not least, indicators should be able to measure the affective state of animals in terms of positive emotions. In this case, rabbits are quite unique as there is little information available on their behavioral needs in farm settings; the degree of suffering associated with behavioral limitations that may occur in farm settings; indicators that can be used in the very different systems and housing conditions in which rabbits may be raised; the relationship between emotions and affective states of animals, and their impact on the viability of rabbits in different settings. In this context, the purpose of this review is to summarize the current state of the art and develop a protocol for assessing rabbit welfare on farms based on the most current knowledge and approaches to measuring both negative and positive affective states of rabbits. Identifying positive indicators of well-being is a great challenge, given the biological and behavioral characteristics of rabbits. Accordingly, a comprehensive and reliable assessment of rabbit welfare on farms cannot do without indicators based on the structure and management of a multi-indicator approach.
References
Birolo, M., Trocino, A., Zuffellato A., Pirrone, F., Bordignon, F., Xiccato, G. (2022). Use of gnawing hay blocks: effects on productive performance, behavior and reactivity of growing rabbits kept in parks with different sex-group compositions. Animals 12: 1212p. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12091212
Blokhuis, H.J., Veissier, I., Miele, M., Jones, B. (2010). The Welfare Quality® project and beyond: safeguarding farm animal well¬being. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A - Anim. Sci., 60: 129-140p. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064702.2010.523480
Botelho, N., Vieira-Pinto, M., Batchelli, P., Pallisera, J., Dalmau, A. (2020). Testing an animal welfare assessment protocol for growing-rabbits reared for meat production based on the Welfare Quality Approach. Animals, 10: 1415p. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10081415
Buijs, S., Tuyttens, F.A.M. (2015). Evaluating the effect of semi-group housing of rabbit does on their offspring’s fearfulness: can we use the open-field test? Applied Animal Behav. Sci., 162: 58¬66p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.11.008
Cohen, S., Ho, C. (2023). Review of rat (Rattus norvegicus), mouse (Mus musculus), guinea pig (Cavia porcellus), and rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) indicators for welfare assessment. Animals, 13: 2167p. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13132167
Dal Bosco, A., Castellini, C., Mugnai, C., (2002). Rearing rabbits on a wire net floor or straw litter: behaviour, growth and meat qualitative traits. Livest. Prod. Sci., 75: 149-156p. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-6226(01)00307-4
Dal Bosco, A., Cartoni Mancinelli, A., Hoy, S., Martino, M., Mattioli, S., Cotozzolo, E., Castellini, C., (2020). Assessing the preference of rabbit does to social contact or seclusion: results of different investigations. Animals, 10: 286p. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10020286
Dalle Zotte, A., Princz, Z., Matics, Zs., Gerencsér, Zs., Metzger, S., Szendro, Zs. (2009). Rabbit preference for cages and pens with or without mirrors. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 116: 273-278p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.08.011
Dalmau, A., Moles, X., Pallisera, J. (2020). Animal welfare assessment protocol for does, bucks, and kit rabbits reared for production. Front. Vet. Sci., 7: 445p. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.00445
de Jong, I.C., Reuvekamp, B.F., Rommers, J.M. (2011). A welfare assessment protocol for commercially housed rabbits. Report 532. Wageningen UR Livestock Research. Lelystad, The Netherlands.
Delibes-Mateos, M., Rodel, H.G., Rouco, C., Alves, P.C., Carneiro, M., Villafuerte, R. (2021). European Rabbit Oryctolagus cuniculus (Linnaeus, 1758), in: Handbook of the Mammals of Europe. Springer, Cham., 1-39p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319- 65038-8_13-1
EFSA. (2005). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) on a request from the Commission related to “The Impact of the current housing and husbandry systems on the health and welfare of farmed domestic rabbits.” EFSA Journal, 3: 267p. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2005.267
EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW) (2012). Statement on the use of animal-based measures to assess the welfare of animals. EFSA Journal, 10: 2767p. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2767
EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW), Saxmose Nielsen, S., Alvarez, J., Bicout, D.J., Calistri, P., Depner, K., Drewe, J.A., Garin-Bastuji, B., Gonzales Rojas, J.L., Gortazar Schmidt, C., Michel, V., Miranda Chueca, M.A., Roberts, H.C., Sihvonen, L.H., Spoolder, H., Stahl K., Velarde Calvo A., Viltrop A., Buijs S., Edwards S., Candiani D., Mosbach-Schulz O., Van der Stede, Y., Winckler, C. (2020). Health and welfare of rabbits farmed in different production systems. EFSA Journal, 18: e05944. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2020.5944
EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW), Nielsen, S.S., Alvarez, J., Bicout, D.J., Calistri, P., Canali, E., Drewe, J.A., Garin-Bastuji, B., Gonzales Rojas, J.L., Gortazar Schmidt, C., Herskin, M., Miranda Chueca, M.A., Michel, V., Padalino, B., Pasquali, P., Roberts, H.C., Spoolder, H., Stahl, K., Velarde, A., Viltrop, A., Edwards, S., Ashe, S., Candiani, D., Fabris, C., Lima, E., Mosbach-Schulz, O., Gimeno, C.R., Van der Stede, Y., Vitali, M., Winckler, C. (2022). Methodological guidance for the development of animal welfare mandates in the context of the Farm to Fork Strategy. EFSA Journal, 20: e07403. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7403
EURCAW-Poultry-SFA.(2023). List of welfare indicators and methods of assessment for rabbits on farm. DL. 2.1.5 Available at: https://zenodo.org/records/7930482. Accessed June 2024.
Farkas, TP, Szendro, Zs., Matics Zs., Radnai, I., Nagy, I., Gerencsér, Zs. (2018). Preference of rabbit does among different nest materials. World Rabbit Sci., 26: 81-90p. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2018.7373
González-Mariscal, G., Hoy, S., Hoffman, K.L. (2022). Rabbit maternal behavior: A perspective from behavioral neuroendocrinology, animal production, and psychobiology, in: Gonzalez-Mariscal G. (Ed.), Patterns of parental behavior: from animal science to comparative ethology and neuroscience, Advances in Neurobiology. Springer International Publishing, Cham., 131-176p. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-97762-7_5
Gümüş, H.G., Agyemang, A.A., Romantsik, O., Sandgren, R., Karlsson, H., Gram, M., Vallius, S., Ley, D., van den Hove, D.L.A., Bruschettini, M. (2018). Behavioral testing and litter effects in the rabbit. Behav. Brain Res., 353: 236-241p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2018.02.032
ITAVI. (2018). Evaluer le bien-etre des lapins en maternite et en croissance. Protocole EBENE. Available at: https://www.itavi.asso.fr/publications/protocole-ebene-guide-pour-les-utilisateurs/download/627bbc3fcf0cd_EBENE_Protocole_ Lapin.pdf.Accessed June 2024.
Jirkof, P., Rudeck, J., Lewejohann, L. (2019). Assessing affective state in laboratory rodents to promote animal welfare – what is the progress in applied refinement research? Animals 9: 1026p. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9121026
LIFT, 2024. Positive Animal Welfare - LIFT - Cost Action CA21124. Available at: https://liftanimalwelfare.eu/about/positive- animal-welfare/Accessed June 2024.
Littlewood, K.E., Heslop, M.V., Cobb, M.L. (2023). The agency domain and behavioral interactions: assessing positive animal welfare using the Five Domains Model. Front. Vet. Sci., 10: 1284869. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1284869
Lockley, R.M. (1961). Social structure and stress in the rabbit warren.J. Anim. Ecol., 30: 385-423p. https://doi.org/10.2307/2305
Mellor, D.J. (2016). Updating animal welfare thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” towards “a Life Worth Living”. Animals, 6: 21. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani6030021
Mellor ,D.J., Reid, C.S.W., (1994). Concepts of animal well-being and predicting the impact of procedures on experimental animals. In: Improving the Well-being of Animals in the Research Environment; Baker, R.M., Jenkin, G., Mellor, D.J., Eds.; Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching: Glen Osmond, Australia; 3-18p. Available online: Concepts of animal well-being and predicting the impact of procedures on experimental animals Accessed December 2024.
Mellor, D.J., Beausoleil, N.J. (2015). Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states. Anim. Welfare 24: 241-253p. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.24.3.241
Mellor, D.J., Beausoleil, N.J., Littlewood, K.E., McLean, A.N., McGreevy, P.D., Jones, B., Wilkins, C. (2020). The 2020 Five domains model: including human-animal interactions in assessments of animal welfare. Animals, 10: 1870. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10101870
Mikó, A., Szendrö, Zs., Matics, Zs., Radnai, I., Odermatt, M., Nagy, I., Gerencsér, Zs. (2012). Free choice of rabbit does between cages with different sizes. In Proc.: 10th World Rabbit Congress. 3-6 September 2012, Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. 1069-1073p. Available at: http://world-rabbit-science.com/WRSA-Proceedings/Congress-2012-Egypt/Egypt-2012-a.htm#welfareAccessed June 2024.
Ministero della Salute, Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Lombardia e dell’Emilia Romagna (2023). Valutazione del benessere animale nell’allevamento del coniglio: Manuale esplicativo controllo ufficiale Classyfarm. Available at: https://www.classyfarm.it/images/documents/VET-UFFICIALE_AGGIORNATO_06-23/Manuale_controllo_ufficiale_coniglio__def_rev.pdf.Accessed June 2024
Morisse, J.P., Boilletot, E., Martrenchar, A. (1999). Preference testing in intensively kept meat production rabbits for straw on wire grid floor. Applied Anim. Behav. Sci., 64: 71-80p. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00023-4
Paulović, T., de Jong, I., Ouweltjes, W., Martin Valls, G.E., Llonch Obiols, P., Ko, H.L., Kieffer, V., Lapeyre, C., Campana, C., Wille, H., Jasinska, A., Spoolder, H. (2024). Development of a roadmap for action for the project More Welfare: towards new risk assessment methodologies and harmonised animal welfare data in the EU. EFSA Supporting Publications 21: 8566E. https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2024.EN-8566
Princz, Zs., Dalle Zotte, A., Radnai, I., Bfró-Németh, E., Matics, Zs., Gerencser, Zs., Nagy, I., Szendrö, Zs., (2008). Behaviour of growing rabbits under various housing conditions. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 11: 342-356p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.06.013
Rault, J.L., Newberry, R.C., Semrov, M.Z. (2023). Editorial: Positive welfare: from concept to implementation. Front. Anim. Sci., 4: 1289659. https://doi.org/10.3389/fanim.2023.1289659
Rödel, H.G. (2022). Aspects of social behaviour and reproduction in the wild rabbit - Implications for rabbit breeding? World Rabbit Sci., 30: 47-59p. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2022.15954
Rödel, H.G., Monclús, R., von Holst, D. (2006). Behavioral styles in European rabbits: social interactions and responses to experimental stressors. Physiol. Behav., 89: 180-188p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2006.05.042
Szendrö, Zs., McNitt, J.I. (2012). Housing of rabbit does: Group and individual systems: A review. Livest. Sci., 150: 1-10p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2012.09.017
Szendrö, Zs., Trocino, A., Hoy, S., Xiccato, G., Villagrá, A., Maertens, L., (2019). A review of recent research outcomes on the housing of farmed domestic rabbits: reproducing does. World Rabbit Sci., 27: 1-14p. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2019.10599
Trocino, A.,Tolini, C. (2024). Measuring on-farm welfare in rabbits: a review with emphasis on animal-based indicators. World Rabbit Sci., 32: 225-240p. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2024.22647
Trocino, A., Xiccato, G. (2006). Animal welfare in reared rabbits: a review with emphasis on housing systems. World Rabbit Sci., 14: 77-93p. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2006.553
Trocino, A., Xiccato, G. (2024). Alojamiento de conejos sin jaulas: luces y sombras. In Proc. 48 Symposium de Cunicultura ASESCU, 23-24/04/2024, Cordoba, Spain.
Trocino, A., Majolini, D., Tazzoli, M., Filiou, E., Xiccato, G., (2013). Housing of growing rabbits in individual, bicellular and collective cages: fear level and behavioural patterns. Animal, 7: 633-639p. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731112002029
Trocino, A., Filiou, E., Tazzoli, M., Bertotto, D., Negrato, E., Xiccato, G. (2014). Behaviour and welfare of growing rabbits housed in cages and pens. Livest. Sci., 167: 305-314p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2014.05.035
Trocino, A., Filiou, E., Zomeño, C., Birolo, M., Bertotto, D., Xiccato, G., (2018). Behaviour and reactivity of female and male rabbits housed in collective pens: effects of floor type and stocking density at different ages. World Rabbit Sci., 26: 135-147p. https://doi.org/10.4995/wrs.2018.7747
Trocino, A., Zomeño, C., Filiou, E., Birolo, M., White, P., Xiccato, G. (2019). The use of environmental enrichments affects performance and behavior of growing rabbits housed in collective pens. Animals, 9: 537p. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9080537
Turner, P.V. (2019). Moving beyond the absence of pain and distress: focusing on positive animal welfare. ILAR J., 60: 366-372p. https://doi.org/10.1093/ilar/ilaa017
Verga, M., Luzi, F., Carenzi, C. (2007). Effects of husbandry and management systems on physiology and behaviour of farmed and laboratory rabbits. Hormones and Behavior, Reproductive Behavior in Farm and Laboratory Animals, 52: 122-129p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2007.03.024
Verga, M., Luzi, F., Petracci, M., Cavani, C. (2009). Welfare aspects in rabbit rearing and transport. It. J. Anim. Sci., 8: 191-204p. https://doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.191
Villafuerte, R., Moreno, S. (1997). Predation risk, cover type, and group size in European rabbits in Donana (SW Spain). Acta Theriologica, 42: 225-230p. https://doi.org/10.4098/AT.arch.97-23
von Holst, D., Hutzelmeyer, H., Kaetzke, P., Khaschei, M., Schonheiter, R. (1999). Social Rank, Stress, Fitness, and Life Expectancy in Wild Rabbits. Naturwissenschaften, 86: 388-393p. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001140050638
von Holst, D., Hutzelmeyer, H., Kaetzke, P., Khaschei, M., Rödel, H.G., Schrutka, H. (2002). Social rank, fecundity and lifetime reproductive success in wild European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus). Behavior. Ecol. Sociobiol., 51: 245-254p. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00265-001-0427-1
Warin, L., Mika, A., Souchet, C., Bouvarel, I. (2021). Feasibility and repeatability of the EBENE® Welfare Assessment measures for rabbits. In Proc.: 12th World Rabbit Congress, 3-5 November 2021, Nantes, France, Communication E-17. Available at: http://world-rabbit-science.com/WRSA-Proceedings/Congress-2021-Nantes/Nantes-2021-01.htm#ethoAccessed June 2024.
