Dynamics of the welfare of dairy cattle affected by podopathies as support for veterinary expertise
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31533/pubvet.v16n01a1024.1-16Keywords:
Foot disorders, bovine, forensic veterinary medicine, conceptual model, feedbackAbstract
Due to the necessity for treatment and prevention of production diseases, such as podopathies, dairy cattle welfare expertise is an innovative and relevant demand in legal and forensic investigations. Veterinary technicians can establish the negligence, malpractice, and imprudence in animal care, and would support judicial decision, in cases of cattle mistreatment, cruelty, and abuse. A dynamic approach is required to understand the podopathies complexity due to non-linear interactions between multifactors and cattle welfare. System Dynamics methodology was used to build a conceptual model of podopathies problems and constructs cause-and-effect relationships based on knowledge and experience of the researchers and literature. The model contains six diagrams with reinforcing and balancing cycles and the respective state variables reference patterns. The dynamic hypotheses highlighted the role of veterinary expertise in assessing the reinforcing the podopathies and welfare interaction that drives the system into a virtuous or vicious circle. It was detailed how podopathies cause pain and suffering, further reinforcing the loss of welfare. The veterinarian's action, motivated by ethical, legal, or social pressure, to promote prevention and treatment, creates balance feedbacks that might elevate welfare to the desired level. The prevention cycles have delayed actions effects on podopathies, resulting in the continuity of pain and suffering, for some time. A counterintuitive synergy emerged between the use of financial resources for production and investments to ensure welfare. As a result, promoting health balancing cycles, reducing podopathies and improving animal welfare positively influence economic. Expertise through negative feedback based on technical, legal, ethical, and human values controls the podopathies incidence influencing actions to improve the welfare. It was concluded that the conceptual model serves as a framework to aid computational modeling and contributes to better understanding of the podopathies complexity in legal and forensic matters. Human actions influence podopathies dynamics, which compromise animal welfare and may lead to evidence of abuse in dairy cattle.
References
Alvergnas, M., Strabel, T., Rzewuska, K., & Sell-Kubiak, E. (2019). Claw disorders in dairy cattle: Effects on production, welfare and farm economics with possible prevention methods. Livestock Science, 222, 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2019.02.011.
Amaral, J. B., & Trevisan, G. (2017). Aspectos da dor e sofrimento no bem-estar de bovinos leiteiros acometidos por podopatias. PUBVET, 11(11), 1074–1187. https://doi.org/10.22256/pubvet.v11n11.1074-1084.
Amaral, J. B., Trevisan, G., Tremori, T. M., & Guerra, S. T. (2018). Fundamentos e aplicações da medicina veterinária forense no bem-estar de bovinos leiteiros: Revisão. PUBVET, 12(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.22256/pubvet.v12n2a37.1-13.
Ataíde Júnior, V. (2018). Introdução ao direito animal brasileiro. Revista Brasileira de Direito Animal, 13(3), 48–76. https://doi.org/10.9771/rbda.v13i3.28768.
Berry, S. L., Read, D. H., Famula, T. R., Mongini, A., & Döpfer, D. (2012). Long-term observations on the dynamics of bovine digital dermatitis lesions on a California dairy after topical treatment with lincomycin HCl. The Veterinary Journal, 193(3), 654–658. https://doi.org/0.1016/j.tvjl.2012.06.048.
Bicalho, R. C., Machado, V. S., & Caixeta, L. S. (2009). Lameness in dairy cattle: A debilitating disease or a disease of debilitated cattle? A cross-sectional study of lameness prevalence and thickness of the digital cushion. Journal of Dairy Science, 92(7), 3175–3184. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2008-1827.
Bond B., G., Almeida, R., Ostrensky, A., & Molento, C. F. M. (2012). Métodos e pontos críticos de bem-estar de bovinos leiteiros. Ciência Rural, 42, 1286–1293. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-84782012005000044.
Braga, J. S., Macitelli, F., Lima, V. A., & Diesel, T. (2018). O modelo dos “Cinco Domínios” do bem-estar animal aplicado em sistemas intensivos de produção de bovinos, suínos e aves. Revista Brasileira de Zoociências, 19(2), 204–226.
BRASIL (2016). Conselho Federal de Medicina Veterinária - CFMV, Resolução nº 1138, de 16 de dezembro de 2016. Aprova o Código de Ética do Médico Veterinário.
BRASIL (2018). Conselho Federal de Medicina Veterinária - CFMV, Resolução nº 1236, de 26 de outubro de 2018. Define e caracteriza crueldade, abuso e maus-tratos contra animais vertebrados. Dispõe sobre conduta de médicos veterinários e zootecnistas e dá outras providências.
Broom, D. M. (1986). Indicators of poor welfare. British Veterinary Journal, 142(6), 524–526.
Bruijnis, M. R. N., Beerda, B., Hogeveen, H., & Stassen, E. N. (2012). Assessing the welfare impact of foot disorders in dairy cattle by a modeling approach. Animal, 6(6), 962–970. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1751731111002606.
Canozzi, M. E. A., Borges, J. A. R., & Barcellos, J. O. J. (2020). Attitudes of cattle veterinarians and animal scientists to pain and painful procedures in Brazil. Preventive Veterinary Medicine, 177, 104909. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prevetmed.2020.104909.
Capion, N., Thamsborg, S. M., & Enevoldsen, C. (2008). Prevalence of foot lesions in Danish Holstein cows. Veterinary Record, 163(3), 80–86. https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.163.3.80.
Carvalhal, M. V. L., & Costa, F. O. (2018). Principais aspectos sobre bem-estar de touros mantidos em centrais de coleta de sêmen. Revista Brasileira de Zoociências, 19(2), 249–264. https://doi.org/10.34019/2596-3325.2018.v19.24737.
Costa, F. O., Valente, T. S., de Toledo, L. M., Ambrósio, L. A., Campo, M., & Paranhos da Costa, M. J. R. (2021). A conceptual model of the human-animal relationships dynamics during newborn handling on cow-calf operation farms. Livestock Science, 246, 104462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104462.
Dawkins, M. S. (2017). Animal welfare and efficient farming: is conflict inevitable? Animal Production Science, 57(2), 201–208.
de Vries, M., Bokkers, E. A. M., van Schaik, G., Botreau, R., Engel, B., Dijkstra, T., & de Boer, I. J. M. (2013). Evaluating results of the Welfare Quality multi-criteria evaluation model for classification of dairy cattle welfare at the herd level. Journal of Dairy Science, 96(10), 6264–6273. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2012-6129
Feitosa, F. L. F. (2014). Semiologia veterinária: A arte do diagnóstico. Grupo Gen-Editora Roca Ltda.
Flecknell, P. A. (2008). Analgesia from a veterinary perspective. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 101(1), 121–124. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aen087.
Forrester, J. W. (1971). Counterintuitive behavior of social systems. Theory and Decision, 2(2), 109–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00148991.
Gaynor, J. S., & Muir, W. W. (2009). Manual de controle da dor em medicina veterinária (Vol. 1). MedVet.
Gleerup, K. B., Andersen, P. H., Munksgaard, L., & Forkman, B. (2015). Pain evaluation in dairy cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 171, 25–32.
Gleerup, K. B., Forkman, B., Otten, N. D., Munksgaard, L., & Andersen, P. H. (2017). Identifying pain behaviors in dairy cattle. WCDS Advances in Dairy Technology, 29, 231–239.
Groves, J. T. (2018). Becoming indispensable by using" Systems Thinking" to tackle challenging and complex problems in practice. American Association of Bovine Practitioners Proceedings of the Annual Conference, 111–112. https://doi.org/10.21423/aabppro20183118.
Hammerschimidt, J., & Molento, C. F. M. (2017). Perícia em bem-estar animal nos crimes de maus-tratos contra animais. In R. A. Tostes, S. T. J. Reis, & V. V Castilho (Eds.), Tratado de medicina veterinária legal. Medvep.
Hammerschmidt, J., & Molento, C. F. M. (2014). Protocolos de perícias em bem-estar animal como subsídio para decisões judiciais em casos de maus-tratos contra animais. Congresso Brasileiro de Bioética e Bem-Estar Animal, 423–426, Curitiba, Paraná, Brasil.
Hemsworth, P. H., Barnett, J. L., Beveridge, L., & Matthews, L. R. (1995). The welfare of extensively managed dairy cattle: A review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 42(3), 161–182. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(94)00538-P.
IASP - International Association for Study of Pain (2020). https://dororofacial.com.br/definicao-de-dor-iasp-2020/ [Acesso 14 de Jun de 2021].
INFOPÉDIA - Dicionários Porto Editora 2021. https://www.infopedia.pt/dicionarios/termos-medicos/tratamento. [Acesso 14 de Jun de 2021].
Katzenberger, K., Rauch, E., Erhard, M., Reese, S., & Gauly, M. (2020). Evaluating the need for an animal welfare assurance programme in South Tyrolean dairy farming. Italian Journal of Animal Science, 19(1), 1146–1156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1828051X.2020.1823897.
Lorena, S. E. R. S., Luna, S. P. L., Lascelles, B. D. X., & Corrente, J. E. (2013). Attitude of Brazilian veterinarians in the recognition and treatment of pain in horses and cattle. Veterinary Anaesthesia and Analgesia, 40(4), 410–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/vaa.12025.
Luna, S. P. L. (2008). Dor, senciência e bem-estar em animais. Ciência Veterinária Nos Trópicos, 11(1), 17–21.
Manson, F. J., & Leaver, J. D. (1988). The influence of dietary protein intake and of hoof trimming on lameness in dairy cattle. Animal Science, 47(2), 191–199. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003356100003263.
McLennan, K. M. (2018). Why pain is still a welfare issue for farm animals, and how facial expression could be the answer. Agriculture, 8(8), 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture8080127.
Molento, C. F. M. (2005). Bem-estar e produção animal: Aspectos econômicos - Revisão. Archives of Veterinary Science, 10(1), 1–11.
Morton, D. B., & Hau, J. (2002). Welfare assessment and humane endpoints. In J. Hau & G. L. van Hooser (Eds.), Handbook of laboratory animal science: essential principles and practices (Vol. 1, pp. 457–486). Seattle, CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/b10416-19.
Neveux, S., Weary, D. M., Rushen, J., von Keyserlingk, M. A. G., & Passillé, A. M. (2006). Hoof Discomfort Changes How Dairy Cattle Distribute Their Body Weight. Journal of Dairy Science, 89(7), 2503–2509. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(06)72325-6
Nicoletti, J. L. M. (2004). Manual de podologia bovina. Manole.
Nunes, M. H. V., Pacheco, A. D., & Wagatsuma, J. T. (2021). Reconhecimento e avaliação da dor em bovinos: Revisão. PUBVET, 15(6), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.31533/pubvet.v15n06a831.1-12.
Ollhoff, R. D., & Ortolani, E. L. (2001). Comparação do crescimento e do desgaste do casco em bovinos taurinos e zebuínos. Ciência Rural, 31, 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0103-84782001000100011.
Olmos, G., Boyle, L., Hanlon, A., Patton, J., Murphy, J. J., & Mee, J. F. (2009). Hoof disorders, locomotion ability and lying times of cubicle-housed compared to pasture-based dairy cows. Livestock Science, 125(2–3), 199–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2009.04.009.
Palmer, M. A., Law, R., & O’Connell, N. E. (2012). Relationships between lameness and feeding behaviour in cubicle-housed Holstein–Friesian dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 140(3–4), 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.06.005.
Payne, J. M. (1972). Production disease. Journal of the Royal Agricultural Society of England, 133, 69–86.
Pinto, A. L. M., Vieira, F. V. R., Garcia, P. R., & Silva, I. J. O. (2020). Manual of good practices for welfare: a proposal for dairy cattle on pasture in Brazil. Journal of Animal Behaviour and Biometeorology, 1(2), 44–51. https://doi.org/10.14269/2318-1265.v01n02a03.
Queiroz, M. L. V., Barbosa Filho, J. A. D., Albiero, D., Brasil, D. F., & Melo, R. P. (2014). Percepção dos consumidores sobre o bem-estar dos animais de produção em Fortaleza, Ceará. Revista Ciência Agronômica, 45, 379–386. https://doi.org/10.17224/energagric.2019v34n4p201-510.
Ramanoon, S. Z., Sadiq, M. B., Shaik Mossadeq, W. M., Mansor, R., & Syed-Hussain, S. S. (2018). The impact of lameness on dairy cattle welfare: Growing need for objective methods of detecting lame cows and assessment of associated pain. Animal Welfare. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.75917.
Richardson, G. P. (1995). Loop polarity, loop dominance, and the concept of dominant polarity (1984). System Dynamics Review, 11(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1002/sdr.4260110106.
Romani, A. F., Silva, L. A. F. ., & Fioravanti, M. C. S. (2004). Ocorrência de lesões podais em fêmeas bovinas leiteiras no Estado de Goiás. ARS Veterinaria, 20(3), 322–392.
Senge, P. M. (2005). La quinta disciplina en la práctica. Ediciones Granica SA.
Shearer, J. K., Stock, M. L., Van Amstel, S. R., & Coetzee, J. F. (2013). Assessment and management of pain associated with lameness in cattle. Veterinary Clinics: Food Animal Practice, 29(1), 135–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvfa.2017.02.009.
Silva, F. F., Alves, C. G. T., & Silva Júnior, F. F. (2016). Pododermatite solar circunscrita, úlcera de husterholz ou úlcera da sola. Ciência Veterinária Nos Trópicos, 9(2/3), 102–105.
Silva, L A F, Campos, S. B. S., Rabelo, R. E., Vulcani, V. A. S., Noronha Filho, A. D. F., & Freitas, S. L. R. (2015). Análise comparativa da morfometria do casco de bovinos das raças Nelore, Curraleira e Pantaneira e de bubalinos e sua relação com a etiopatogenia das enfermidades digitais. Pesquisa Veterinária Brasileira, 35(4), 377–384.
Silva, L A F, Rezende, M. R., Romani, A. F., Fioravanti, M. C. S., Cunha, P. H. J., Borges, J. R. J., Macedo, S. P., Damasceno, A. D., Rabelo, R. E., & Garcia, A. M. (2006). Pododermatite séptica em bovinos: evolução clínica da fase inicial. Brazilian Journal of Veterinary Research and Animal Science, 43(5), 674–680.
Slowinski, K., Tremori, T. M., Massad, M. R. R., Tasaka, A. C., & Rocha, N. S. (2016). Responsabilidade ética e civil do médico-veterinário no ambiente hospitalar. Revista de Educação Continuada Em Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia Do CRMV-SP, 14(2), 30–37.
Souza, R. C., Ferreira, P. M., Molina, L. R., Carvalho, A. U., & Facury Filho, E. J. (2006). Perdas econômicas ocasionadas pelas enfermidades podais em vacas leiteiras confinadas em sistema free stall. Arquivo Brasileiro de Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia, 58, 982–987. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0102-09352006000600002.
Sterman, J. (2000). Business dynamics. McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Ting, S. T. L., Earley, B., Hughes, J. M. L., & Crowe, M. A. (2003). Effect of ketoprofen, lidocaine local anesthesia, and combined xylazine and lidocaine caudal epidural anesthesia during castration of beef cattle on stress responses, immunity, growth, and behavior. Journal of Animal Science, 81(5), 1281–1293.
Toledo, L. M., Fernandes, T. B., Costa, M. J. R. P., & Ambrósio, L. A. (2018). Modelling the dynamics of cow-calf dyadic behavior. International Journal of System Dynamics Applications, 7(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.36440/recmvz.v11i3.17373.
Tremori, T. M., & Rocha, N. S. (2013). Exame do corpo de delito na Perícia Veterinária (ensaio). Revista de Educação Continuada Em Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia Do CRMV-SP, 11(3), 30–35.
Van Dyke, R., Miele, A., & Connor, M. (2021). An Investigation into the perceptions of veterinarians towards calf welfare in New Zealand. Animals, 11(2), 421. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11020421.
von Keyserlingk, M. A. G., Rushen, J., Passillé, A. M., & Weary, D. M. (2009). Invited review: The welfare of dairy cattle—Key concepts and the role of science. Journal of Dairy Science, 92(9), 4101–4111. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2009-2326
Voyer, J., & Jordan, T. (2018). Veterinary telemedicine: A system dynamics case study. Systems, 6(1), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/systems6010006.
Weary, D. M., & Von Keyserlingk, M. A. G. (2017). Public concerns about dairy-cow welfare: how should the industry respond? Animal Production Science, 57(7), 1201–1209. https://doi.org/10.1071/an16680.
Welfare Quality (2009), Welfare Quality assessment protocol for cattle. Welfare Quality Consortium, Lelystad, Netherlands.
Wilson, G., Bryan, J., Cranston, K., Kitzes, J., Nederbragt, L., & Teal, T. K. (2017). Good enough practices in scientific computing. PLoS Computational Biology, 13(6), e1005510. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189878.
Yang, D. A., Laven, R. A., Müller, K. R., & Gates, M. C. (2020). Modelling the transmission dynamics of bovine digital dermatitis in New Zealand pastoral dairy production systems. Veterinary Research, 51(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13567-020-00750-8.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Jackson Barros do Amaral, Luís Alberto Ambrósio
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Você tem o direito de:
Compartilhar — copiar e redistribuir o material em qualquer suporte ou formato
Adaptar — remixar, transformar, e criar a partir do material para qualquer fim, mesmo que comercial.
O licenciante não pode revogar estes direitos desde que você respeite os termos da licença. De acordo com os termos seguintes:
Atribuição
— Você deve dar o crédito apropriado, prover um link para a licença e indicar se mudanças foram feitas. Você deve fazê-lo em qualquer circunstância razoável, mas de nenhuma maneira que sugira que o licenciante apoia você ou o seu uso. Sem restrições adicionais
— Você não pode aplicar termos jurídicos ou medidas de caráter tecnológico que restrinjam legalmente outros de fazerem algo que a licença permita.
