Qualitative Behavioural Assessment as a Method to Identify Potential Stressors during Commercial Sheep Transport.

Land transport is an unavoidable experience for most livestock, yet there is limited research comparing animal welfare under different conditions. We video recorded sheep responses during short (2 h) commercial road transport journeys. Using Qualitative Behavioural Assessment, observers (blinded to the treatments) scored the behavioural expression of sheep and reached significant consensus in their scoring patterns (p < 0.001). There were also significant effects of vehicle crate design (sheep transported in a 'standard' crate were more calm/relaxed than those transported in a 'convertible' crate), deck position (sheep on upper decks were more curious/alert than those on lower decks), and sheep breed (fat-tail sheep were more agitated/distressed than merino sheep) on observer scores. We only found marginal differences for sheep originating from feedlot or saleyard. Significant effects of vehicle driver (included as a random factor in all but one of our analyses) suggest driving patterns contributed to demeanour of the sheep. Finally, the fourteen drivers who participated in the study were asked their opinions on livestock transport; none of the factors we tested were identified by drivers as important for sheep welfare during transport. This study supports the use of qualitative measures in transport and revealed differences that could inform truck design.

Validating the use of qualitative behavioral assessment as a measure of the welfare of sheep during transport.

We tested the application of qualitative behavioral assessment (QBA) as a welfare assessment tool. Sheep were exposed to road transport treatments, and behavioral expressions were compared between experimental treatments and validated by correlation with physiological measures. We compared journeys differing in ventilation (closed vs. open-sided trailer), flooring (grip vs. nongrip flooring), and driving styles (stop-start vs. continuous driving). Blood samples were collected immediately before loading and after unloading; heart rate and core body temperatures were recorded continuously. Continuous video footage was edited to show individual sheep to observers for QBA using free-choice profiling (observers used their own descriptive terms). There was significant consensus in observers' scores for the sheep in each experiment (p < .001). Observers distinguished between sheep exposed to flooring (p = .014) or driving-style (p = .005) treatments, but not between ventilation treatments. QBA scores were compared (p < .05) with plasma leptin, glucose, and insulin-like growth factor-1 concentrations; white blood cell profiles; red blood cell counts; hematocrit; body temperatures; and heart rate variability. Observer assessments reflected treatment differences, and correlations between behavioral expression and physiological responses were found.