Remote Identification of Sheep with Flystrike Using Behavioural Observations

Control of sheep flystrike: what's been tried in the past and where to from here

Flystrike remains a serious financial and animal welfare issue for the sheep industry in Australia despite many years of research into control methods. The present paper provides an extensive review of past research on flystrike, and highlights areas that hold promise for providing long-term control options. We describe areas where the application of modern scientific advances may provide increased impetus to some novel, as well as some previously explored, control methods. We provide recommendations for research activities: insecticide resistance management, novel delivery methods for therapeutics, improved breeding indices for flystrike-related traits, mechanism of nematode-induced scouring in mature animals. We also identify areas where advances can be made in flystrike control through the greater adoption of well-recognised existing management approaches: optimal insecticide-use patterns, increased use of flystrike-related Australian Sheep Breeding Values, and management practices to prevent scouring in young sheep. We indicate that breeding efforts should be primarily focussed on the adoption and improvement of currently available breeding tools and towards the future integration of genomic selection methods. We describe factors that will impact on the ongoing availability of insecticides for flystrike control and on the feasibility of vaccination. We also describe areas where the blowfly genome may be useful in providing impetus to some flystrike control strategies, such as area-wide approaches that seek to directly suppress or eradicate sheep blowfly populations. However, we also highlight the fact that commercial and feasibility considerations will act to temper the potential for the genome to act as the basis for providing some control options.

Preliminary Findings on a Novel Behavioural Approach for the Assessment of Pain and Analgesia in Lambs Subject to Routine Husbandry Procedures

Simple Summary

The identification and assessment of pain in sheep are important but, due to their stoic nature, are difficult. In the present study, we evaluated the use of qualitative behavioural assessment to assess pain in lambs caused by routine husbandry procedures performed at lamb marking (ear tagging, castration, mulesing, and tail docking). To do this, video footage of control lambs and of lambs subject to these procedures that were either administered analgesics (Tri-Solfen and meloxicam) or a placebo, was captured 1.5 h post-procedure and assessed by 19 observers. Results showed that the observers agreed in their assessment of the lambs and, as expected, the pain caused by the husbandry procedures altered the behavioural patterns and demeanour of the lambs in a way that was captured by observers using this approach. At the time of assessment, it also appears that the analgesics administered did not reduce the pain experienced by those lambs that received them. These results suggest that qualitative behavioural assessment may be useful in identifying pain in lambs; however further work is needed to test this methodology with lambs given effective analgesic pain relief.

Abstract

The identification and assessment of pain in sheep under field conditions are important, but, due to their stoic nature, are fraught with many challenges. In Australia, various husbandry procedures that are documented to cause pain are routinely performed at lamb marking, including ear tagging, castration, mulesing, and tail docking. This study evaluated the validity of a novel methodology to assess pain in lambs: qualitative behavioural assessment (QBA) was used to compare the behavioural expression of control lambs (CONTROL) with that of lambs subject to these procedures that received either a saline placebo 15 min before procedures (PLACEBO), or were administered meloxicam 15 min before procedures in addition to the standard analgesic Tri-Solfen at the time of procedures, as per the manufacturer’s recommendations (ANALGESIC TREATMENT; AT). In terms of behavioural expression, it was expected that: CONTROL ≠ PLACEBO, AT = CONTROL, and PLACEBO ≠ AT. Video footage of the 6−8-week-old lambs (n = 10 for each treatment) was captured approximately 1.5 h postprocedure and was presented, in a random order, to 19 observers for assessment using the Free-Choice Profiling (FCP) approach to QBA. There was significant consensus (p < 0.001) among the observers in their assessment of the lambs, with two main dimensions of behavioural expression explaining 69.2% of the variation. As expected, observers perceived differences in the demeanour of lambs in the first dimension, scoring all lambs subject to the routine husbandry procedures as significantly more ‘dull’ and ‘uneasy’ compared to the control lambs (p < 0.05). Contrary to expectations, the results also suggested that analgesic treatment did not provide relief at the time of observation. Further investigations to validate the relationship between behavioural expression scores and pain are necessary, but these results suggest that painful husbandry procedures alter the behavioural expression of lambs and these differences can be captured using QBA methodology.