Pain sensitivity and healing of hot-iron cattle brands

A nationwide survey on producer and veterinarian perceptions of the painfulness of procedures and disease states in dairy and beef cattle

Failure to adequately manage pain in cattle causes suffering and is thus a welfare concern for the livestock industry. The objectives of this study were to summarize caregiver perceptions of the painfulness of various procedures and disease conditions in cattle. This survey also assessed factors that impact the perception of painfulness and determined relationships between pain perception and mitigation in producers and veterinarians in the United States beef and dairy cattle industries. An online survey was distributed via organization listservs and social media groups representing beef and dairy veterinarians and producers. The survey included questions about respondent demographics and pain perception and frequency of pain mitigation use for a variety of common husbandry procedures and disease conditions in cattle less than 2 months, 2-12 months, and greater than 12 months of age. Descriptive statistics were generated, and ordinal logistic regressions were used to assess the relationship between perceived pain level, frequency of pain mitigation use, and respondent demographic factors (e.g., gender, age, and role). There was a relatively low percentage of respondents that identified there was "no pain" associated with the listed procedures and conditions. Across the majority of procedures and conditions and cattle age categories, men perceived procedures to be less painful than women (P < 0.05). Veterinarians and producer-veterinarians perceived procedures to be more painful than producers (P < 0.05) for the majority of procedures and conditions. There were some differences identified between respondent age groups in pain perception but the trends were not consistent across procedures and conditions. There was a significant positive linear trend, with greater perceived pain associated with greater likelihood of providing local and systemic analgesia for all procedures and conditions across all cattle age categories (P ≤ 0.02). Perception of pain is complex and multifactorial, and it influences the likelihood to treat pain in cattle. This research highlighted the importance of understanding how these factors may play a role in increasing the use of pain mitigation within the beef and dairy industries.

Assessing Extensive Cow-Calf Welfare in Namibia: Feasibility of Adapting a New Zealand Beef Cow Welfare Assessment Protocol

Namibia needs a robust welfare assessment protocol for beef cattle for benchmarking and trade. As there is presently no such protocol, one was developed for Namibian conditions based on one designed for extensive beef cattle in New Zealand which had been derived from the Welfare Quality and UC Davis Cow-Calf protocols, the modified protocol was evaluated in a semi-commercial farming village during the pregnancy testing of 141 cows from 5 herds of different households. Animal- and stockperson-based measures were assessed directly, cows were observed at grazing, and a questionnaire-guided interview was conducted. The protocol provided a good basis for welfare assessment, but additional measures and modifications were needed for the Namibian system. These were the effects of recurrent drought, predation, plant poisoning, external parasites, walking long distances to water and grazing, compulsory hot-iron branding, extraneous cattle marking, and variable standards of handling facilities. The protocol was modified to incorporate these changes, resulting in a total of 40 measures. It now needs full validation through widespread testing across the range of beef production systems used in Namibia.

Limited Effects of Pain Control Treatments on Behaviour and Weight Gain of Pure and Crossbred Nellore Heifer Calves When Subjected to Hot-Iron Branding

Hot-iron branding is still commonly performed in cattle farming in tropical countries, and possibly has negative consequences for animal welfare and weight gain. This study examined the behavioural and weight gain responses of pure and crossbred Nellore heifer calves subjected to hot-iron branding on the cheek, without and with use of anaesthesia and analgesia. Ninety-two heifer calves, around 120 days old, were studied prospectively when subjected to hot-iron branding on the cheek (a statutory procedure in Brazil following brucellosis vaccination). Four randomly selected groups of calves were allocated to four treatments: no pain control (CO); subcutaneous anaesthetic local block (LA); intramuscular analgesia (meloxicam) (LT); and local anaesthesia plus meloxicam (LL). Behaviour, flight speed and body weight were evaluated before, during, and five (5-d) and 60 days (60-d) after branding. For these parameters, the only difference observed was higher tension in the CO group 5-d post-branding, suggesting a short-term negative effect of branding without pain control. The limited effects of the pain control treatments suggest interference in pain assessment by other factors, such as expression of fear and stress. Despite the lack of differences observed in behaviour and production parameters, facial hot-iron branding is an obvious welfare issue and, due to the additional handling involved, adoption of a simple pain relief protocol is not sufficient to minimise the welfare impact.

Frequency of disagreements between producers and veterinarians about pain management in cattle

•

Cattle producers and veterinarians engage in conversations about pain mitigation.

•

Differences in opinion are infrequent and do not appear to affect their relationships.

•

Both producers and veterinarians rely on personal experiences to identify pain in cattle.

•

There is an opportunity to develop educational programs regarding pain management decisions.

Pain management is a key element of ensuring animal welfare. Although the opinions of both producers and veterinarians affect decisions about the use of pain mitigation on cattle operations, little is known about how they communicate about this topic. Given the importance of a veterinary-client-patient relationship for developing pain mitigation protocols, understanding the communication between veterinarians and producers is key to the implementation of robust, industry-wide pain management protocols. The objectives of this survey were to understand how producers and veterinarians may respond to disagreements about pain mitigation and to determine where respondents obtain their knowledge about pain recognition and treatment. Results presented herein are part of a larger study previously described. An online survey was distributed to 6 cattle industry groups. Surveys that were >80% complete were included for analysis (n = 1,066). Approximately half of the respondents identified as producers (497, 46.6%) and half as veterinarians (569, 53.4%). The majority of producers believed that disagreements about the use of pain management in cattle never affected their relationship with their veterinarians (349, 70.2%). The veterinarian respondents indicated more disagreements, although the frequency was relatively low, with 43.9% (250) indicated having a disagreement less than once a year. Most producers and veterinarians indicated they were either “extremely unlikely” or “somewhat unlikely” to dissolve the relationship completely if disagreements about pain management arose (veterinarians: 398/569, 70%; producers: 294/497, 59.1%). Veterinarians and producers reported gaining their knowledge about pain recognition from a variety of sources including personal experience and continuing education opportunities. Disagreements about pain mitigation occurred infrequently; however, this could be due to few discussions about pain management in general. These results indicated that there is opportunity for veterinarians to engage with their producers in more discussions about pain management.

The effect of breed, sex and oral meloxicam administration on pain biomarkers following hot-iron branding in Hereford and Angus calves

Hot-iron branding uses thermal injury to permanently identify cattle causing painful tissue damage. The primary objective was to examine the physiological and behavioral effects of oral meloxicam (MEL), compared to a control, administered at the time of hot-iron branding in Angus and Hereford steers and heifers. The secondary objectives were to investigate breed and sex effects on pain biomarkers. A total of 70 yearlings, consisting of 35 heifers and 35 steers (Angus, Hereford, or Angus × Hereford), were enrolled in the study. Animals were blocked by sex, randomized across weight, and assigned to receive MEL (1 mg/kg) or a placebo (CON). Biomarkers were assessed for 48 h after branding and included infrared thermography (IRT), mechanical nociceptive threshold (MNT), accelerometry and a visual analog scale (VAS), and serum cortisol and prostaglandin E₂ metabolites (PGEM). Wound healing was assessed for 12 wk. Hair samples to quantify cortisol levels were taken prior to and 30 d post-branding. Responses were analyzed using repeated measures with calf nested in treatment as a random effect, and treatment, time, treatment by time interaction, breed, and sex as fixed effects. There was a treatment by time interaction for PGEM (P < 0.01) with MEL having lower values than CON at 6, 24, and 48 h (MEL: 18.34 ± 3.52, 19.61 ± 3.48, and 22.24 ± 3.48 pg/mL, respectively; CON: 32.57 ± 3.58, 37.00 ± 3.52, and 33.07 ± 3.48 pg/mL; P < 0.01). MEL showed less of a difference in maximum IRT values between the branded (2.27 ± 0.29 °C) and control site (3.15 ± 0.29 °C; P < 0.01). MEL took fewer lying bouts at 0–12 h (4.91 bouts ± 0.56) compared with CON (6.87 bouts ± 0.55; P < 0.01). Compared with Hereford calves, Angus calves exhibited greater serum but lower hair cortisol, greater PGEM, more lying bouts, and less healed wound scores at 3, 4, and 5 wk. Compared with heifers, steers exhibited lower PGEM, lower branding site and ocular IRT, higher MNT, and lower plasma meloxicam levels. Steers spent more time lying, took more lying bouts and had greater VAS pain, and more healed wound scores at 5 wk than heifers. Meloxicam administration at branding reduced branding and control site temperature differences and reduced lying bouts for the first 12 h. Breed and sex effects were observed across many biomarkers. Changes from baseline values for IRT, MNT, lying time, step count, VAS pain, and wound scoring all support that branding cattle is painful.

Hot-iron branding uses thermal injury to permanently identify cattle causing painful tissue damage. The primary objective was to examine the effects of oral meloxicam (MEL), compared with a control, administered at the time of hot-iron branding in Angus and Hereford steers and heifers. The secondary objectives were to investigate breed and sex effects on pain biomarkers. A total of 70 yearlings, consisting of 35 heifers and 35 steers (Angus, Hereford, or Angus × Hereford), were enrolled. Animals were assigned to receive MEL or a placebo. Changes from baseline values for infrared thermography (IRT), mechanical nociceptive threshold, lying time, step count, visual analog scale score, and wound scoring all support that hot-iron branding cattle is painful and investigation into analgesic strategies is needed. MEL administration reduced IRT differences from the branding and control site and reduced lying bouts. Breed and sex effects were observed across a wide range of biomarkers and should be considered in future pain studies. The practicality of administering a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug once at the time of branding is attractive. However, a multimodal approach using a combination of analgesics or longer acting analgesic option warrants further investigation to alleviate pain and discomfort caused by hot-iron branding.

Early Life Painful Procedures: Long-Term Consequences and Implications for Farm Animal Welfare

Farm animals routinely undergo painful husbandry procedures early in life, including disbudding and castration in calves and goat kids, tail docking and castration in piglets and lambs, and beak trimming in chicks. In rodents, inflammatory events soon after birth, when physiological systems are developing and sensitive to perturbation, can profoundly alter phenotypic outcomes later in life. This review summarizes the current state of research on long-term phenotypic consequences of neonatal painful procedures in rodents and farm animals, and discusses the implications for farm animal welfare. Rodents exposed to early life inflammation show a hypo-/hyper-responsive profile to pain-, fear-, and anxiety-inducing stimuli, manifesting as an initial attenuation in responses that transitions into hyperresponsivity with increasing age or cumulative stress. Neonatal inflammation also predisposes rodents to cognitive, social, and reproductive deficits, and there is some evidence that adverse effects may be passed to offspring. The outcomes of neonatal inflammation are modulated by injury etiology, age at the time of injury and time of testing, sex, pain management, and rearing environment. Equivalent research examining long-term phenotypic consequences of early life painful procedures in farm animals is greatly lacking, despite obvious implications for welfare and performance. Improved understanding of how these procedures shape phenotypes will inform efforts to mitigate negative outcomes through reduction, replacement, and refinement of current practices.

Evaluation of non-invasive bioforensic techniques for determining the age of hot-iron brand burn scars in cattle

Hot-iron branding is a traditional form of permanent cattle identification in the United States. There is a need for science-based determination of cattle brand age. Near infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) has been used to obtain information about animal tissues and healing processes. Height-width allometry and NIRS were applied to hot-iron cattle brand scars to determine if either or both of these methods can be used to non-invasively establish the interval sincethe application of hot-iron cattle brands. Length and width of a brand routinely applied to calves (~30–60 d old) were established and then the same measurements were recorded on 378 calfhood branded cattle of known age ranging from 0.5 to > 6.5 yr-of-age. Brand width and height increased over the original measurements by > 100% between calfhood application and 2.5 yr-of-age (P < 0.001). Brand size did not change dramatically between 2.5 and > 6.5 yr, however, both width and height were (P < 0.05) greater at maturity than at weaning. Near infrared spectra were collected from a) branded skin b) non-clipped (hair), non-branded skin, and c) hair clipped, non-branded skin on Bos taurus cross calves. Individual trial calibrations yielded high R² and low SE of calibration values as well as similar cross validation performance (P < 0.001). Numerically lower but still strong performance (P < 0.001) resulted from combined data set calibrations. Cross-trial prediction of brand age was unsuccessful. One single year calibration underpredicted (P < 0.001) brand age of an independent validation set by 2.83 d, and another single year calibration underpredicted (P < 0.001) the same validation set by 9.91 d. When combined, these two datasets resulted in a calibration that overpredicted brand age in the validation set by 6.9 d (P < 0.02). Discriminant analyses for identification of skin surface type yielded success rates of 90% for branded, 99% for non-clipped, non-branded, and 96% for clipped, non-branded (P < 0.01). Discriminant analyses were also performed on samples grouped into a) less than 33 d, b) 141–153 d, and c) 169 d categories. All group membership identifications were successful at greater than 90% (P < 0.01). Preliminary results indicate that brand size could be used to indicate brand age and that NIRS can predict brand age as well as discriminate between broad brand age groups in cattle. More work will need to be done before these techniques can be used in real-world forensic applications.

Pain Management in Farm Animals: Focus on Cattle, Sheep and Pigs

Simple Summary

Pain causes behavioral, autonomic and neuroendocrine changes and is a common cause of animal welfare compromise in farm animals. These recommendations focus on cattle, sheep, and pigs, and present the implications of unmanaged pain in terms of animal welfare and ethical perspectives, and its challenges and misconceptions. We provide an overview of pain management including assessment and treatment applied to the most common husbandry procedures, and recommendations to improve animal welfare in these species.

Abstract

Pain causes behavioral, autonomic, and neuroendocrine changes and is a common cause of animal welfare compromise in farm animals. Current societal and ethical concerns demand better agricultural practices and improved welfare for food animals. These guidelines focus on cattle, sheep, and pigs, and present the implications of pain in terms of animal welfare and ethical perspectives, and its challenges and misconceptions. We provide an overview of pain management including assessment and treatment applied to the most common husbandry procedures, and recommendations to improve animal welfare in these species. A cost-benefit analysis of pain mitigation is discussed for food animals as well as the use of pain scoring systems for pain assessment in these species. Several recommendations are provided related to husbandry practices that could mitigate pain and improve farm animal welfare. This includes pain assessment as one of the indicators of animal welfare, the use of artificial intelligence for automated methods and research, and the need for better/appropriate legislation, regulations, and recommendations for pain relief during routine and husbandry procedures.

Analgesia for Sheep in Commercial Production: Where to Next?

Simple Summary

Increasing societal and customer pressure to provide animals with ‘a life worth living’ continues to apply pressure on industry to alleviate pain associated with husbandry practices, injury and illness. Although a number of analgesic solutions are now available for sheep, providing some amelioration of the acute pain responses, this review has highlighted a number of potential areas for further research.

Abstract

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.

Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: Pharmacokinetics and Mitigation of Procedural-Pain in Cattle

Common routine management practices in cattle, such as castration and disbudding, are recognized as being painful. In the United States (U.S.), these procedures are frequently performed without pain mitigation and there are currently no drugs federally approved for such use. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, such as meloxicam, flunixin meglumine and aspirin, are the most commonly used analgesics in U.S. food-animal production systems. However, the body of research investigating the effectiveness of these pharmaceuticals to control pain in cattle at castration and disbudding has not been comprehensively evaluated. Therefore, this review examined existing literature to summarize meloxicam, flunixin and aspirin (1) pharmacokinetics (PK) and (2) administration outcome in regard to pain control during castration and disbudding procedures, in cattle. Following systematic searches and screening, 47 PK and 44 publications were extracted for data and are presented. The sample size contained notable variability and a general deficiency of validated and replicated methodologies for assessing pain in cattle remain substantial challenges within this research area. Future research should prioritize replication of pain assessment methodologies across different experimental conditions to close knowledge gaps identified by the present study and facilitate examination of analgesic efficacy.

Assessing Extensive Semi-Arid Rangeland Beef Cow-Calf Welfare in Namibia. Part 2: Categorisation and Scoring of Welfare Assessment Measures

This paper aims to develop standards for a welfare assessment protocol by validating potential categorisation thresholds for assessing beef farms in various beef cow-calf production systems in Namibia. Forty measures, combined from a New Zealand-based protocol plus Namibia-specific measures, are applied to 55 beef farms (17 commercial farms, 20 semi-commercial and 18 communal village farms) during pregnancy testing, and a questionnaire guided interview. The categorised measures on a 3-point welfare score (0: good, 1: marginal, and 2: poor/unacceptable welfare) are subsequently compared with the derivation of thresholds based upon the poorest 15% and best 50% of herds for each measure. The overall combined thresholds of continuous measures across the three farm types show 10/22 measures that posed welfare compromise across Namibia, whereas commercial farms have 4/22 measures, and semi-commercial and communal village farms have 12/22 and 11/22, respectively, with high thresholds. Most measures-imposed thresholds are retained because of significant importance to the welfare of animals and preventiveness of the traits, while leniency was given to adjust good feeding and mortality measures to signify periods of drought. Handling measures (fearful, falling/lying) and abrasions thresholds are adjusted to reflect the temporary stress caused by infrequent cattle handling, and faulty yard designs/design and possible cattle breed influence on handling. Hence, Namibia needs prioritised investigation of underlying contributing factors and remediation to reduce the high thresholds.

Nociceptive Threshold of Calves and Goat Kids Undergoing Injection of Clove Oil or Isoeugenol for Disbudding

Simple Summary

Hot-iron disbudding in calves and goat kids is a widespread husbandry procedure involving pain and, especially in goats, the risk of brain damage. The injection of clove oil under the horn bud is a potential alternative disbudding method. Clove oil, with its active substance eugenol, is cytotoxic but has anaesthetic effects, and the injection of clove oil, or the pure substance isoeugenol, under the horn bud to stop horn growth may have potential welfare benefits compared to hot-iron disbudding. We compared the injection of clove oil with the injection of isoeugenol under the horn bud with respect to pain sensitivity in this area in the first 24 h after injection. Compared to before injection, the pain sensitivity of goats kids was higher 24 h after injection of clove oil and up to at least 6 h after isoeugenol injection, while, in calves, pain sensitivity was highest after 9 h. Future studies should compare the welfare effects of isoeugenol injection with hot-iron disbudding.

Abstract

In this preliminary study, we compared changes in mechanical nociceptive thresholds (MNT) of calves and goat kids injected with clove oil or isoeugenol under the horn bud as a potential, more welfare-friendly alternative to hot-iron disbudding. Twenty male calves and goat kids were randomly allocated to clove oil (n = 10 per species) or isoeugenol (n = 10 per species) injection under the horn buds. MNT was measured via a pressure algometer in calves and kids at several locations around the horn buds at several time points before and up to 24 h after injection. In kids, von Frey filaments were used additionally at the same time points. In calves, linear mixed models revealed an effect on MNT of time point (p = 0.010) and side (p = 0.007), but not of injection (p = 0.298), nor of the interaction ‘injection*time point’, MNT waslowest 9 h post-injection. In goats, there was an effect of injection depending on time point (interaction injection*time point, p = 0.03) with MNT being lowest 24 h post-injection for clove oil, while MNT was similar to pre-injection in isoeugenol. In both species, variation in the individual response post-injection was very high. Our results suggest that clove oil and isoeugenol induced hypersensitivity, which was higher for clove oil, in goat kids, but they also suggest a transient anaesthetic effect in some animals and locations.

Effect of subcutaneous meloxicam on indicators of acute pain and distress after castration and branding in 2-mo-old beef calves1,2

The aim of this study was to assess knife castration and knife castration + branding in 2-mo-old calves, and the effect of a single dose of s.c. meloxicam at mitigating pain indicators. Seventy-one Angus crossbred bull calves (128 ± 18.5 kg of BW) were used in a 3 × 2 factorial design where main factors included procedure: sham (control calves, CT; n = 23), knife (KN; n = 24) or knife + branding (BK; n = 24), and medication: single s.c. administration of lactated ringer solution (NM; n = 35) or a single dose of 0.5 mg/kg of s.c. meloxicam (M; n = 36). Physiological samples were collected at T0, 60, 90, 120, and 180 min and on days 1, 2, 3, and 7 after procedure, whereas behavioral observations were evaluated at 2 to 4 h and 1, 2, 3, and 7 days after procedure. A procedure × time effect (P < 0.01) was observed for cortisol, where KN and BK calves had greater (P ≤ 0.01) cortisol concentrations than CT calves 60 min after the procedure, whereas BK calves had the greatest (P < 0.05) cortisol concentrations, followed by KN calves and by CT calves 90, 120, and 180 min after the procedure. A procedure × time effect (P = 0.01) was observed for tail flicks, where KN and BK calves had a greater (P < 0.05) number of tail flicks than CT calves on days 1 and 3, whereas BK calves had the greatest number of tail flicks, followed by KN calves, and then by CT calves on day 2. Haptoglobin had a procedure × medication × time interaction (P = 0.05), where BK-NM calves had greater haptoglobin concentrations than BK-M, KN-M, and CT calves on days 1 and 3, whereas BK-NM and KN-NM calves had greater haptoglobin concentrations than BK-M, KN-M, and CT calves on day 2 after the procedure. Lying duration and tail flicks had a medication effect (P = 0.04; P < 0.01) where M calves had greater (P < 0.05) lying duration and lower (P < 0.05) number of tail flicks than NM calves 2 to 4 h after procedure. No medication effects (P > 0.10) were observed for salivary cortisol, substance P, and scrotal temperature minutes after the procedure or for cortisol, substance P, serum amyloid-A, stride length, or behavioral observations days after the procedure. Overall, BK calves presented greater physiological and behavioral indicators of acute pain than KN calves, suggesting that the combination of knife castration + branding was more painful. Meloxicam administered s.c. was effective at reducing physiological and behavioral indicators of acute pain associated with knife castration and knife castration + branding.

Conditioned place preference reveals ongoing pain in calves 3 weeks after disbudding

Hot-iron disbudding, a routine procedure that prevents horn bud growth through cauterization, is painful for calves. The resulting burns remain sensitive to touch for weeks, but it is unknown whether calves experience ongoing, non-evoked pain. We evaluated conditioned place preference for analgesia in 44 calves disbudded or sham-disbudded 6 hours (Day 0) or 20 days (Day 20) before testing (n = 11/treatment). Calves were conditioned to associate the effects of a lidocaine cornual nerve block with the location and pattern of a visual stimulus, and a control injection of saline with the contrasting stimulus. On Day 0, disbudded calves tended to prefer the lidocaine-paired stimulus over the saline-paired one, suggesting that they found analgesia rewarding. On Day 20, sham calves avoided the lidocaine-paired stimulus, consistent with humans’ experience of this drug being painful. Disbudded calves on Day 20 did not show this aversion, suggesting that they traded off the short-term pain of the lidocaine with the longer-term analgesia provided. Day 0 sham calves did not avoid the lidocaine-paired stimulus, likely because they received less than half the dose of Day 20 calves during conditioning. Thus, higher doses of lidocaine are aversive to uninjured animals, but disbudded calves are willing to engage in this cost. We conclude that calves experience ongoing pain 3 weeks after disbudding, raising additional welfare concerns about this procedure.

Iron and laterality effects on healing of cautery disbudding wounds in dairy calves

Hot-iron disbudding, the process of cauterizing the horn buds of calves or goat kids at an early age to prevent horn growth, is routinely practiced in dairy production. The wounds take weeks to heal and are painful to touch throughout this time. Possible strategies to hasten the healing of disbudding wounds are not well understood, but the type of iron used may be an important factor to consider. When evaluating strategies to hasten healing, a within-subjects design may be preferable, but laterality effects might act as a potential source of variation and confounding in this type of experiment. Our objectives were to compare healing after disbudding with 2 commercially available irons, and to determine whether wounds healed differently on the left versus the right side of the head. Ten Holstein calves 4 to 10 d of age were disbudded using the Rhinehart X50A electric disbudder (Rhinehart Development Corp., Spencerville, IN) on one horn bud and the Portasol gas disbudder (Portasol USA, Elmira, OR) on the other; side (left vs. right) was balanced between treatments. We scored wounds daily for the presence of 6 tissue types: attached necrotic tissue, detached necrotic tissue, exudate, granulation, crust, and epithelium. Surface temperature and size of the wound were measured twice-weekly using thermal and digital photographs, respectively. The type of iron used did not affect latency to re-epithelialize, which took on average (mean ± standard deviation) 53 ± 3 d and 55 ± 3 d for Portasol and Rhinehart wounds, respectively (range: 40-70 d). However, compared with Portasol wounds, those from the Rhinehart had fewer days of granulation tissue and tended to have more days of detached necrotic tissue. The Portasol tip had a smaller total surface area than the Rhinehart, which may have resulted in a less severe burn, causing the necrotic tissue to fall off sooner. The left side tended to re-epithelialize faster than the right side (mean ± standard error: left 51 ± 3 d; right 57 ± 3 d) and have fewer days of crust. Left-sided wounds were also cooler and tended to be smaller than those on the right. To assess the external validity of these laterality effects in our primary experiment (experiment A), we analyzed wound healing data from 2 other disbudding studies, one on calves (experiment B) and one on goat kids (experiment C). We observed laterality effects in the opposite direction in Experiment B, but negligible effects in experiment C, indicating that the differences in laterality had low external validity; the biological meaning of this asymmetry is unclear. Nonetheless, if using a within-subjects design, asymmetries in wound healing should be considered to avoid confounding effects. In conclusion, wounds from both irons took 7 to 8 wk to heal, on average; other strategies to accelerate healing should be explored.

Effect of a single dose of subcutaneous meloxicam before knife castration alone or combined with hot-iron branding on scrotal healing, inflammatory response, and behaviour in 2-mo-old beef calves over 42 d post procedure

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of a single subcutaneous injection of meloxicam on scrotal healing, inflammatory response, and behaviour in castrated or castrated and branded beef calves for 42 d post procedure. Seventy-two 2-mo-old Angus crossbred bull calves were used to assess the effects of procedure (Trt): (1) sham control, (2) knife castration, and (3) knife castration and hot-iron branding; and pain mitigation (Med): (1) nonmedicated and (2) medicated with meloxicam according to a 3 × 2 factorial design. Body weight, scrotal circumference (SC), and healing scores were collected weekly until day 42. Blood samples were collected weekly until day 42 to assess haptoglobin, serum amyloid-A, and complete blood cell count. Hair was collected on day −1 and day 42 to assess cortisol concentrations. Lying and standing behaviour were recorded for 42 d, whereas pain-related behaviours were recorded on days 7, 15, 22, 29, and 34 post procedure. The inflammatory response (SC) and duration of standing was greater (P < 0.05) in calves castrated and branded than those only castrated. However, meloxicam did not reduce inflammation or improve wound healing in either castrated or castrated and branded calves.

Branding Practices on Four Dairies in Kantale, Sri Lanka

Simple Summary

Branding cattle with hot irons is a painful procedure, inflicting severe burns that take weeks to heal. Although Sri Lanka prohibits hot-iron branding, the practice is still common in some areas of the country but has not been described. We observed branding practices on four smallholder farms and identified welfare concerns and challenges impeding adoption of alternative methods of identification, such as ear tags. Farmers used multiple irons to mark their initials and, in some cases, their address, with the largest brands extending across the ribs and hip. Farmers did not consider ear tags a viable alternative to hot-iron branding because of issues with security and tag retention. Hot-iron branding raises serious animal welfare concerns and efforts to introduce more welfare-friendly alternatives are needed.

Abstract

Hot-iron branding is illegal in Sri Lanka, but is still commonly used to identify dairy herds in extensive farming systems, which are primarily located in the country’s Dry Zone. Despite the negative welfare implications of this practice, there is no written documentation of branding in this region. We observed branding on four smallholder farms in Kantale, Eastern Province to understand the welfare implications associated with the procedure and challenges limiting the uptake of more welfare-friendly alternatives, such as ear tagging. Areas of welfare concern included the duration of restraint, the size and location of the brand, and the absence of pain relief. Animals were restrained with rope for an average duration of 12 min (range 8–17 min). Farmers used multiple running irons to mark their initials and, in some cases, their address, with the largest brands extending across the ribs and hip. Three farmers applied coconut or neem oil topically to the brand after performing the procedure. No analgesics were given before or after branding. Farmers reported that poor ear tag retention in extensive systems and theft were the main factors impeding the uptake of alternative forms of identification. Branding is also practiced as part of traditional medicine in some cases. Given the clear evidence that hot-iron branding impairs animal welfare and there is no evidence that this can be improved, alternative identification methods are needed, both in Sri Lanka, as well as in other countries engaging in this practice.

Evaluating treatments with topical anaesthetic and buccal meloxicam for pain and inflammation caused by amputation dehorning of calves

To assess the effects of a topical anaesthetic (TA) and buccal meloxicam (BM) on behaviour, maximum wound temperature and wound morphology following amputation dehorning of beef calves, 50 unweaned Hereford calves were randomly allocated to: (1) sham dehorning / control (CON, n = 14); (2) amputation dehorning (D, n = 12); (3) amputation dehorning with pre-operative buccal meloxicam (DBM, n = 12); and (4) amputation dehorning with post-operative topical anaesthetic (DTA, n = 12). Videos of the calves were captured for 3 h following treatment. Each calf was later observed for 5 min every hour and the frequency and duration of specific behaviours displayed during these focal periods was recorded. Infrared and digital photographs of dehorning wounds were collected from all dehorned calves on days 1, 3 and 7 following treatment. Infrared photographs were used to identify the maximum temperature within the wound area. Digital photographs were used to score wounds based on visual signs of inflammation and healing, using a numerical rating scale of 1 to 3, with morphological aspects of inflammation increasing and morphological aspects of healing decreasing with progressive scores. CON calves displayed fewer head shakes than all dehorned calves at 2 and 3 h following treatment (P = 0.025). CON and DTA calves displayed less head turns than DBM calves at 2 h following treatment (P = 0.036). CON calves displayed fewer combined point behaviours than all dehorned calves at 2 h following treatment (P = 0.037). All dehorning wounds had a greater maximum temperature on days 3 and 7 compared to day 1 (P = 0.003). All wound morphology scores decreased from day 1 to day 3 and wound morphology scores of DBM and DTA calves increased from day 3 to day 7 (P = 0.03). Although flystrike may have confounded these observations, no clear effects of TA or BM on behaviour, maximum wound temperature or wound morphology following dehorning of calves were observed. Further research is required to evaluate the analgesic efficacy of these products for amputation dehorning of calves.

Survey of disbudding practice on Czech dairy farms

Disbudding is a routine practice in many dairy herds due to the effort to decrease the risk of injuries. Although the disbudding practice is regulated, it can vary among farms. The variation may be caused by many factors, such as herd size or type of breed, but also by farmers' perception of pain caused by disbudding. Hence, the aim of this study was to specify the disbudding practice on dairy farms in the Czech Republic and to assess these practices, including the use of pain mitigation medication, by breed, herd size, and sex of the disbudded calves. We analyzed data from 106 Czech dairy farms, which were collected by a trained interviewer at dairy meetings in 2014-2015. The farmers answered questions regarding the farm's basic characteristics, disbudding practice, and his/her attitude to the pain caused by disbudding. To test the influence of breed, herd size, and sex of disbudded calves on different variables, logistic regression models were used. Disbudding was performed in 92.5% of the surveyed farms; 63.3% of dairy calves were disbudded before 4 wk of age, and Czech Fleckvieh calves were 2.8 times more likely to be disbudded before 4 wk of age than Holstein calves. The hot-iron method was the most used method (69.4%). Calves were 4.5 times more likely to be disbudded by hot iron in herds where both heifers and bulls were disbudded than in herds where only heifers were disbudded. Most (>90%) surveyed farms did not use any pre- or post-procedure medication to mitigate the pain caused by disbudding. The disbudding procedure was performed mainly by farm personnel (94.9%), who were trained by a veterinarian or veterinary technician (46.9%) or by other farm personnel (37.8%) or were not trained (15.3%). Two-thirds of farmers observed behavioral changes in calves after disbudding. Most farmers estimated the pain caused by disbudding to be mild or moderate (20.4 or 45.9%, respectively) and 15.3% of farmers estimated it to be severe. Almost a quarter of interviewed farmers were unable to assess the duration of pain, 39.8% farmers estimated that the pain lasts only several minutes, and 20.4% estimated that the pain lasts up to 6 h. We detected a tendency that farmers of larger herds estimated pain duration to be shorter (odds ratio = 1.2). To improve calves' welfare, training is needed in disbudding practice, focusing on the advantage of pain mitigation.

Management practices associated with pain in cattle on western Canadian cow-calf operations: A mixed methods study

The implementation of on-farm pain mitigation strategies is dependent on feasibility and importance to producers. Currently, there is a lack of information regarding adoption of management practices associated with pain in cattle within the Canadian beef industry. The objective of this mixed methods study was to describe pain-associated practices implemented on farm and producer perceptions toward pain mitigation strategies. A questionnaire about calving management and calf processing was delivered to 109 cow-calf producers in western Canada. In addition, 15 respondents were purposively selected based on questionnaire responses to participate in individual semistructured, on-farm interviews. The prevalence of pain mitigation strategies used for dystocia and cesarean section by respondents were 46 and 100%, respectively. The majority of operations reported castrating and dehorning calves before 3 mo of age (95 and 89%, respectively). The majority of operations did not use pain mitigation strategies for castration and dehorning (90 and 85%, respectively). Branding was practiced by 57% of respondents, 4% of which used pain mitigation. Thematic content analysis revealed that producers' perception of pain were influenced by what they referred to as "common sense," relatability to cattle, visual evidence of pain, and age of the animal. Factors that influenced participant rationale for the implementation of pain mitigation practices included access to information and resources, age of the animal, benefit to the operation, cost and logistics, market demands, and personal conscience. Overall, management practices were generally in compliance with published Canadian guidelines. Results of this study may provide direction for future policy making, research, and extension efforts to encourage the adoption of pain mitigation strategies.

Beef cattle welfare in the USA: identification of priorities for future research

This review identifies priorities for beef cattle welfare research in the USA. Based on our professional expertise and synthesis of existing literature, we identify two themes in intensive aspects of beef production: areas where policy-based actions are needed and those where additional research is required. For some topics, considerable research informs best practice, yet gaps remain between scientific knowledge and implementation. For example, many of the risk factors and management strategies to prevent respiratory disease are understood, but only used by a relatively small portion of the industry. This is an animal health issue that will require leadership and discussion to gain widespread adoption of practices that benefit cattle welfare. There is evidence of success when such actions are taken, as illustrated by the recent improvements in handling at US slaughter facilities. Our highest priorities for additional empirical evidence are: the effect of technologies used to either promote growth or manage cattle in feedlots, identification of management risk factors for disease in feedlots, and management decisions about transport (rest stops, feed/water deprivation, climatic conditions, stocking density). Additional research is needed to inform science-based recommendations about environmental features such as dry lying areas (mounds), shade, water and feed, as well as trailer design.

Wound Care

Wound care requires an understanding of normal wound healing, causes of delays of wound healing, and the management of wounds. Every wound must be treated as an individual with regard to cause, chronicity, location, and level of microbial contamination, as well as patient factors that affect wound healing. Knowledge of wound care products available and when negative pressure wound therapy and drain placement is appropriate can improve outcomes with wound healing. Inappropriate product use can cause delays in healing. As a wound healing progresses, management of a wound and the bandage material used must evolve.