In commercial settings, broiler chickens and rainbow trout are housed in barren environments under high stocking densities, due to an emphasis on production efficiency. These monotonous housing conditions do not provide broilers or trout with the ability to perform functional, highly-motivated behaviors and increase their susceptibility to excessive anxiety and fear, resulting in negative affective states and poor animal welfare. Affective state (or emotional state) is a cumulative product of short-term life experiences, ranging from positive to negative. Because affective states are largely influenced by environmental condition, determining animal affective state can provide useful information on how to improve housing conditions in order to ensure positive experiences and good animal welfare. Cognitive processes are closely associated with affective state; a "cognitive bias" occurs when affective state influences aspects of cognition, such as judgement and attention. Animals in positive affective states make optimistically-biased decisions during ambiguous situations, judging the situation as if it will produce a positive outcome, and show less bias towards a perceived threat, responding in a less anxious and calm manner. Animals in negative affective states make pessimistically-biased decisions during ambiguous situations, judging the situation as if it will result in a negative outcome. Additionally, animals in negative affective states will bias their attention towards a perceived threat rather than alternative stimuli, responding in an anxious manner. Therefore, judgement and attention bias tests can be used to determine animal affective states.
In Chapter 3, a judgement bias test was used to determine affective state of broiler chickens housed in either complex (perches, dust bath, pecking stones, and rotating enrichment objects) or barren (no enrichment) environments under either high or low stocking densities. Broilers housed in complex environments responded more optimistically during the judgement bias test than broilers from barren environments, indicating the former were in a positive affective state. Stocking density did not impact their responses in the judgement bias test, indicating that affective states were not impacted by that treatment. In Chapter 4, an attention bias test was used to determine level of anxiety and a tonic immobility test was used to determine fear in order to investigate affective state of broilers housed in the same conditions as described for Chapter 3. Broilers housed in complex environments were less anxious during the attention bias test than broilers from barren environments, indicating environmental complexity reduced anxiety in broilers. Stocking density did not impact anxiety. Broilers from high stocking density environments had shorter tonic immobility durations than broilers from low stocking density environments, suggesting the former were less fearful. Environmental complexity did not impact fearfulness. In Chapter 5, a judgement bias test was used to determine affective state of rainbow trout housed in either complex (shelter structure and artificial plants) or barren (no enrichment) tanks under either low or high stocking densities. Trout housed in high stocking density tanks responded optimistically during the judgement bias test, indicating they were in a more positive affective state compared to trout housed in low stocking density tanks. Environmental complexity did not impact their responses in the judgement bias test, indicating no effect of enrichments on affective states was found.
These results indicate a beneficial relationship of a complex environment on broiler chicken affective state, observed through an optimistic judgement bias and reduced attention bias (anxiety) towards a perceived threat. Thus, providing a complex housing environment for broilers can improve their welfare and result in a positive affective state. Rainbow trout reared at the tested high density resulted in a positive affective state, although complexity did not benefit their welfare. Our results contribute much needed information on stocking densities to ensure fish welfare. Overall, environmental complexity, not stocking density, had a positive impact on broiler chicken affective states. Rainbow trout affective states were positively impacted by stocking density, but not environmental complexity. / Master of Science / Conventional housing of broiler chickens and rainbow trout (both raised for meat) causes concern for their welfare and affective states. Environmental conditions can greatly impact animals' affective states–their long-term emotional state, ranging from positive to negative. In barren environments at high stocking densities, broiler chickens and rainbow trout are prevented from showing normal behaviors and these conditions can compromise their affective state and welfare. By 'asking' chickens and trout whether the glass is half full or half empty, we can determine level of optimism or pessimism, and level of anxiety or calmness, therefore gaining a better understanding of their affective states. This can be done using a judgement bias test and attention bias test, where animal responses (optimism and anxiety) are recorded during ambiguous situations (judgement) and threatening situations (attention). Animals in positive affective states judge ambiguous situations optimistically (glass half full) and pay little attention towards perceived threats, while animals in negative affective states judge the same ambiguous situations pessimistically (glass half empty) and pay more attention towards perceived threats.
In Chapter 3, responses to ambiguous situations were used to determine the affective state of broiler chickens housed in either enriched (perches, dust bath, pecking stones, rotating toys) or barren environments at either high or low stocking densities. Broiler chickens housed in enriched environments had an optimistic judgement bias of ambiguous situations (glass half full), suggesting they were in a more positive affective state compared to broilers housed in barren environments. Stocking density did not impact their level of optimism. In Chapter 4, responses to a perceived threat were used to determine level of anxiety and a tonic immobility test was used to determine fear of broilers housed under the same conditions as in Chapter 3. Broilers housed in enriched environments paid less attention to a perceived threat than broilers housed in barren environments, indicating the former were less anxious (glass half full) and in a positive affective state. Fear was not impacted by the tested enrichments, but birds kept under higher stocking densities did show reduced fear compared to birds in low-density environments. In Chapter 5, rainbow trout were housed in either enriched (shelter structure and artificial plants) or barren tanks at either high or low stocking densities. Affective state was evaluated through their responses to ambiguous situations. Trout housed in high stocking density environments had an optimistic judgement bias of ambiguous situations (glass half full), suggesting they were in a more positive affective state than trout housed in low stocking density environments. The enrichments did not impact their responses during the test, suggesting they did not impact fish optimism.
These results indicate that an enriched environment improves broiler affective state and welfare compared to conventional housing conditions, the tested densities did not impact their welfare. Although an enriched environment did not positively impact responses of trout during ambiguous situations, our results show that housing rainbow trout in large groups results in a positive affective state and improved welfare status compared to housing trout in small groups. Overall, environmental enrichment, not stocking density, had a positive impact on broiler chicken affective states. Rainbow trout affective states were positively impacted by stocking density, but not environmental enrichment.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:VTETD/oai:vtechworks.lib.vt.edu:10919/105133 |
| Date | 30 September 2021 |
| Creators | Anderson, Mallory G. |
| Contributors | Animal and Poultry Sciences, Jacobs, Leonie, Feuerbacher, Erica N., Arnott, Gareth |
| Publisher | Virginia Tech |
| Source Sets | Virginia Tech Theses and Dissertation |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | ETD, application/pdf |
| Rights | In Copyright, http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ |
Page generated in 0.0031 seconds