This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.

Prof. David Mellor
BSc(Hons), PhD. Hon.Assoc.RCVS, ONZM, Foundation Director of Animal Welfare Science and Bioethics Centre, School of Veterinary Science, Massey University, Palmerston North 4442, New Zealand

Basic Info

Basic Info is private.

Research Keywords & Expertise

0 Stress physiology
0 livestock slaughter
0 Fetal and neonatal physiology
0 Pain assessment and management
0 Conceptual frameworks in animal welfare science

Fingerprints

Fetal and neonatal physiology
Conceptual frameworks in animal welfare science

Honors and Awards

The user has no records in this section


Career Timeline

The user has no records in this section.


Short Biography

The user biography is not available.
Following
Followers
Co Authors
The list of users this user is following is empty.
Following: 0 users

Feed

Journal article
Published: 22 August 2021 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

A thoracic squeeze has been observed to cause both healthy and low vigour neonatal foals to enter a ‘less-responsive state’, characterised by loss of posture, eye closure and cessation of movement, from which they rapidly recover to express normal healthy behaviours when the squeeze is released. To date, there have been no systematic studies characterising the responses of healthy neonates of other mammalian species to a thoracic squeeze. We describe the responses of healthy newborn piglets (n = 17) to a standardised application of the thoracic squeeze and evaluate the effect of the method of squeeze application on the response. Neonatal piglets were squeezed around the chest with either a soft fabric rope as has been used in foals (n = 8) or a novel purpose-made inflation cuff (n = 9). Both methods were effective at inducing a less-responsive behavioural state in all piglets, with neural reflexes reduced or absent in over half of them. The inflation cuff appeared to induce the less-responsive state faster than the rope, and more piglets squeezed with the cuff remained in this state for the full 10-min squeeze. These findings suggest that the behavioural response of foals to thoracic squeezing can be generalised to neonates of other precocial mammalian species. This initial study provides a foundation for further research using the inflation cuff to explore mechanisms underlying the thoracic squeeze and ways in which it may be applied whilst performing husbandry procedures.

ACS Style

Sophia E. Holdsworth; Nikki J. Kells; Kirsty L. Chidgey; Emilie Vallée; Neil Ward; David J. Mellor; Ngaio J. Beausoleil. Characterisation of the Behavioural Effects of a Thoracic Squeeze in Healthy Newborn Piglets. Animals 2021, 11, 2465 .

AMA Style

Sophia E. Holdsworth, Nikki J. Kells, Kirsty L. Chidgey, Emilie Vallée, Neil Ward, David J. Mellor, Ngaio J. Beausoleil. Characterisation of the Behavioural Effects of a Thoracic Squeeze in Healthy Newborn Piglets. Animals. 2021; 11 (8):2465.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sophia E. Holdsworth; Nikki J. Kells; Kirsty L. Chidgey; Emilie Vallée; Neil Ward; David J. Mellor; Ngaio J. Beausoleil. 2021. "Characterisation of the Behavioural Effects of a Thoracic Squeeze in Healthy Newborn Piglets." Animals 11, no. 8: 2465.

Journal article
Published: 15 July 2021 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

We previously developed a Ten-Stage Protocol for scientifically assessing the welfare of individual free-roaming wild animals using the Five Domains Model. The protocol includes developing methods for measuring or observing welfare indices. In this study, we assessed the use of remote camera traps to evaluate an extensive range of welfare indicators in individual free-roaming wild horses. Still images and videos were collected and analysed to assess whether horses could be detected and identified individually, which welfare indicators could be reliably evaluated, and whether behaviour could be quantitatively assessed. Remote camera trapping was successful in detecting and identifying horses (75% on still images and 72% on video observation events), across a range of habitats including woodlands where horses could not be directly observed. Twelve indicators of welfare across the Five Domains were assessed with equal frequency on both still images and video, with those most frequently assessable being body condition score (73% and 79% of observation events, respectively), body posture (76% for both), coat condition (42% and 52%, respectively), and whether or not the horse was sweating excessively (42% and 45%, respectively). An additional five indicators could only be assessed on video; those most frequently observable being presence or absence of weakness (66%), qualitative behavioural assessment (60%), presence or absence of shivering (51%), and gait at walk (50%). Specific behaviours were identified in 93% of still images and 84% of video events, and proportions of time different behaviours were captured could be calculated. Most social behaviours were rarely observed, but close spatial proximity to other horses, as an indicator of social bonds, was recorded in 36% of still images, and 29% of video observation events. This is the first study that describes detailed methodology for these purposes. The results of this study can also form the basis of application to other species, which could contribute significantly to advancing the field of wild animal welfare.

ACS Style

Andrea Harvey; John Morton; David Mellor; Vibeke Russell; Rosalie Chapple; Daniel Ramp. Use of Remote Camera Traps to Evaluate Animal-Based Welfare Indicators in Individual Free-Roaming Wild Horses. Animals 2021, 11, 2101 .

AMA Style

Andrea Harvey, John Morton, David Mellor, Vibeke Russell, Rosalie Chapple, Daniel Ramp. Use of Remote Camera Traps to Evaluate Animal-Based Welfare Indicators in Individual Free-Roaming Wild Horses. Animals. 2021; 11 (7):2101.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Andrea Harvey; John Morton; David Mellor; Vibeke Russell; Rosalie Chapple; Daniel Ramp. 2021. "Use of Remote Camera Traps to Evaluate Animal-Based Welfare Indicators in Individual Free-Roaming Wild Horses." Animals 11, no. 7: 2101.

Review
Published: 14 October 2020 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Throughout its 25-year history, the Five Domains Model for animal welfare assessment has been regularly updated to include at each stage the latest authenticated developments in animal welfare science thinking. The domains of the most up-to-date Model described here are: 1 Nutrition, 2 Physical Environment, 3 Health, 4 Behavioural Interactions and 5 Mental State. The first four domains focus attention on factors that give rise to specific negative or positive subjective experiences (affects), which contribute to the animal’s mental state, as evaluated in Domain 5. More specifically, the first three domains focus mainly on factors that disturb or disrupt particular features of the body’s internal stability. Each disturbed or disrupted feature generates sensory inputs which are processed by the brain to form specific negative affects, and these affects are associated with behaviours that act to restore the body’s internal stability. As each such behaviour is essential for the survival of the animal, the affects associated with them are collectively referred to as “survival-critical affects”. In contrast, Domain 4, now named Behavioural Interactions, focusses on evidence of animals consciously seeking specific goals when interacting behaviourally with (1) the environment, (2) other non-human animals and (3) as a new feature of the Model outlined here, humans. The associated affects, evaluated via Domain 5, are mainly generated by brain processing of sensory inputs elicited by external stimuli. The success of the animals’ behavioural attempts to achieve their chosen goals is reflected in whether the associated affects are negative or positive. Collectively referred to as “situation-related affects”, these outcomes are understood to contribute to animals’ perceptions of their external circumstances. These observations reveal a key distinction between the way survival-critical and situation-related affects influence animals’ aligned behaviours. The former mainly reflect compelling motivations to engage in genetically embedded behavioural responses, whereas the latter mainly involve conscious behavioural choices which are the hallmarks of agency. Finally, numerous examples of human–animal interactions and their attendant affects are described, and the qualitative grading of interactions that generate negative or positive affect is also illustrated.

ACS Style

David J. Mellor; Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Katherine E. Littlewood; Andrew N. McLean; Paul D. McGreevy; Bidda Jones; Cristina Wilkins. The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human–Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare. Animals 2020, 10, 1870 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor, Ngaio J. Beausoleil, Katherine E. Littlewood, Andrew N. McLean, Paul D. McGreevy, Bidda Jones, Cristina Wilkins. The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human–Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare. Animals. 2020; 10 (10):1870.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor; Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Katherine E. Littlewood; Andrew N. McLean; Paul D. McGreevy; Bidda Jones; Cristina Wilkins. 2020. "The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human–Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare." Animals 10, no. 10: 1870.

Review articles
Published: 20 February 2020 in New Zealand Veterinary Journal
Reads 0
Downloads 0

This review outlines the processes followed by New Zealand Thoroughbred Racing (NZTR) when developing its Thoroughbred Welfare Assessment Guidelines. It accepted that guidance on welfare management must be based on up-to-date knowledge of how animal welfare is understood scientifically. NZTR established an expert panel to facilitate this process. First, major changes in animal welfare science thinking over the last 40 years were considered. For example, the separate biological function and affective state orientations were later accepted as dynamically interacting elements within the body operating as an integrated whole entity; conceptual problems with the Five Freedoms framework led to the formulation of the Five Provisions and Welfare Aims paradigm and development of the Five Domains Model for assessing nutritional, environmental, health, behavioural and mental facets of animal welfare; and the initial major focus on negative experiences evolved to include both negative and positive experiences. The Five Domains Model was very effective for illustrating up-to-date understanding of animal welfare and its use demonstrated how comprehensive animal welfare assessments may be conducted. The NZTR panel followed a sequential approach that included an update on animal welfare thinking and the Five Provisions and Welfare Aims paradigm; the generic Five Domains Model was refocused specifically on equids; a detailed model assessment of equine welfare practices was conducted; enhanced equine welfare practices were emphasised by comparing them to inadequate welfare practices; guidelines were framed in terms which provide domain-specific advice on provisions that achieve positive welfare; other domain-specific guidelines were focused on welfare-compromising consequences of inadequate provisions; and welfare-appropriate conditions were clarified for all stages of a Thoroughbred's life cycle (in work and rest) to facilitate exercising a life-long duty of care. Finally, the guidelines were expressed in general terms to avoid them becoming overly detailed and unwieldy. They therefore do not address specific welfare issues such as use of whips, bits, spurs and tight nosebands, however the Five Domains Model may also be used for these specific purposes. The guidelines, and the way they were formulated, provide an example of one approach which other organisations may find immediately useful, or which may stimulate them to devise their own approaches when progressing such equine welfare initiatives.

ACS Style

D J Mellor; M Burns. Using the Five Domains Model to develop welfare assessment guidelines for Thoroughbred horses in New Zealand. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 2020, 68, 150 -156.

AMA Style

D J Mellor, M Burns. Using the Five Domains Model to develop welfare assessment guidelines for Thoroughbred horses in New Zealand. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 2020; 68 (3):150-156.

Chicago/Turabian Style

D J Mellor; M Burns. 2020. "Using the Five Domains Model to develop welfare assessment guidelines for Thoroughbred horses in New Zealand." New Zealand Veterinary Journal 68, no. 3: 150-156.

Review
Published: 16 January 2020 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Vital for informing debates about the ways we interact with wild animals and their associated habitats is knowledge of their welfare status. To date, scientific assessments of the welfare of free-roaming wild animals during their normal day-to-day lives are not available, in part because the required methodology had not been developed. Accordingly, we have devised, and here describe, a ten-stage protocol for systematically and scientifically assessing the welfare of individual non-captive wild animals, using free-roaming horses as an example. Applying this ten-stage protocol will enable biologists to scientifically assess the welfare of wild animals and should lead to significant advances in the field of wild animal welfare. Knowledge of the welfare status of wild animals is vital for informing debates about the ways in which we interact with wild animals and their habitats. Currently, there is no published information about how to scientifically assess the welfare of free-roaming wild animals during their normal day-to-day lives. Using free-roaming horses as an example, we describe a ten-stage protocol for systematically and scientifically assessing the welfare of individual non-captive wild animals. The protocol starts by emphasising the importance of readers having an understanding of animal welfare in a conservation context and also of the Five Domains Model for assessing welfare. It goes on to detail what species-specific information is required to assess welfare, how to identify measurable and observable indicators of animals’ physical states and how to identify which individuals are being assessed. Further, it addresses how to select appropriate methods for measuring/observing physical indicators of welfare, the scientific validation of these indicators and then the grading of animals’ welfare states, along with assigning a confidence score. Finally, grading future welfare risks and how these can guide management decisions is discussed. Applying this ten-stage protocol will enable biologists to scientifically assess the welfare of wild animals and should lead to significant advances in the field of wild animal welfare.

ACS Style

Andrea M. Harvey; Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Daniel Ramp; David J. Mellor. A Ten-Stage Protocol for Assessing the Welfare of Individual Non-Captive Wild Animals: Free-Roaming Horses (Equus Ferus Caballus) as an Example. Animals 2020, 10, 148 .

AMA Style

Andrea M. Harvey, Ngaio J. Beausoleil, Daniel Ramp, David J. Mellor. A Ten-Stage Protocol for Assessing the Welfare of Individual Non-Captive Wild Animals: Free-Roaming Horses (Equus Ferus Caballus) as an Example. Animals. 2020; 10 (1):148.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Andrea M. Harvey; Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Daniel Ramp; David J. Mellor. 2020. "A Ten-Stage Protocol for Assessing the Welfare of Individual Non-Captive Wild Animals: Free-Roaming Horses (Equus Ferus Caballus) as an Example." Animals 10, no. 1: 148.

Review
Published: 18 October 2019 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Presented is an updated understanding of the development of sensory systems in the offspring of a wide range of terrestrial mammals, the prenatal exposure of those systems to salient stimuli, and the mechanisms by which that exposure can embed particular sensory capabilities that prepare newborns to respond appropriately to similar stimuli they may encounter after birth. Taken together, these are the constituents of the phenomenon of “trans-natal sensory continuity” where the embedded sensory capabilities are considered to have been “learnt” and, when accessed subsequently, they are said to have been “remembered”. An alternative explanation of trans-natal sensory continuity is provided here in order to focus on the mechanisms of “embedding” and “accessing” instead of the potentially more subjectively conceived outcomes of “learning” and “memory”. Thus, the mechanistic concept of “intrauterine sensory entrainment” has been introduced, its foundation being the well-established neuroplastic capability of nervous systems to respond to sensory inputs by reorganising their neural structures, functions, and connections. Five conditions need to be met before “trans-natal sensory continuity” can occur. They are (1) sufficient neurological maturity to support minimal functional activity in specific sensory receptor systems in utero; (2) the presence of sensory stimuli that activate their aligned receptors before birth; (3) the neurological capability for entrained functions within specific sensory modalities to be retained beyond birth; (4) specific sensory stimuli that are effective both before and after birth; and (5) a capability to detect those stimuli when or if they are presented after birth in ways that differ (e.g., in air) from their presentation via fluid media before birth. Numerous beneficial outcomes of this process have been reported for mammalian newborns, but the range of benefits depends on how many of the full set of sensory modalities are functional at the time of birth. Thus, the breadth of sensory capabilities may be extensive, somewhat restricted, or minimal in offspring that are, respectively, neurologically mature, moderately immature, or exceptionally immature at birth. It is noted that birth marks a transition from intrauterine sensory entrainment to extrauterine sensory entrainment in all mammalian young. Depending on their neurological maturity, extrauterine entrainment contributes to the continuing maturation of the different sensory systems that are operational at birth, the later development and maturation of the systems that are absent at birth, and the combined impact of those factors on the behaviour of newborn and young mammals. Intrauterine sensory entrainment helps to prepare mammalian young for life immediately after birth, and extrauterine sensory entrainment continues this process until all sensory modalities develop full functionality. It is apparent that, overall, extrauterine sensory entrainment and its aligned neuroplastic responses underlie numerous postnatal learning and memory events which contribute to the maturation of all sensory capabilities that eventually enable mammalian young to live autonomously.

ACS Style

David J. Mellor. Preparing for Life After Birth: Introducing the Concepts of Intrauterine and Extrauterine Sensory Entrainment in Mammalian Young. Animals 2019, 9, 826 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor. Preparing for Life After Birth: Introducing the Concepts of Intrauterine and Extrauterine Sensory Entrainment in Mammalian Young. Animals. 2019; 9 (10):826.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor. 2019. "Preparing for Life After Birth: Introducing the Concepts of Intrauterine and Extrauterine Sensory Entrainment in Mammalian Young." Animals 9, no. 10: 826.

Opinion
Published: 13 July 2019 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The focus of this opinion is on the key features of sentience in animals which can experience different states of welfare, encapsulated by the new term ‘welfare-aligned sentience’. This term is intended to exclude potential forms of sentience that do not enable animals in some taxa to have the subjective experiences which underlie different welfare states. As the scientific understanding of key features of sentience has increased markedly during the last 10 to 15 years, a major purpose here is to provide up-to-date information regarding those features. Eleven interconnected statements about sentience-associated body functions and behaviour are therefore presented and explained briefly. These statements are sequenced to provide progressively more information about key scientifically-supported attributes of welfare-aligned sentience, leading, in their entirety, to a more comprehensive understanding of those attributes. They are as follows: (1) Internal structure–function interactions and integration are the foundations of sentience; (2) animals posess a capacity to respond behaviourally to a range of sensory inputs; (3) the more sophisticated nervous systems can generate subjective experiences, that is, affects; (4) sentience means that animals perceive or experience different affects consciously; (5) within a species, the stage of neurobiological development is significant; (6) during development the onset of cortically-based consciousness is accompanied by cognitively-enhanced capacities to respond behaviourally to unpredictable postnatal environments; (7) sentience includes capacities to communicate with others and to interact with the environment; (8) sentience incorporates experiences of negative and positive affects; (9) negative and positive affective experiences ‘matter’ to animals for various reasons; (10) acknowledged obstacles inherent in anthropomorphism are largely circumvented by new scientific knowledge, but caution is still required; and (11) there is increasing evidence for sentience among a wider range of invertebrates. The science-based explanations of these statements provide the foundation for a brief definition of ‘welfare-aligned sentience’, which is offered for consideration. Finally, it is recommended that when assessing key features of sentience the same emphasis should be given to positive and negative affective experiences in the context of their roles in, or potential impacts on, animal welfare.

ACS Style

David J. Mellor. Welfare-aligned Sentience: Enhanced Capacities to Experience, Interact, Anticipate, Choose and Survive. Animals 2019, 9, 440 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor. Welfare-aligned Sentience: Enhanced Capacities to Experience, Interact, Anticipate, Choose and Survive. Animals. 2019; 9 (7):440.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor. 2019. "Welfare-aligned Sentience: Enhanced Capacities to Experience, Interact, Anticipate, Choose and Survive." Animals 9, no. 7: 440.

Journal article
Published: 28 July 2018 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

There is a growing interest and need for zoos to develop and implement welfare assessment tools that are practical to use and provide meaningful results that can inform management decisions. This paper presents a process that was developed to support this type of evidence-based management in zoo animal welfare. The process is configured to facilitate institutional risk assessment, using an adapted version of the Five Domains Model for animal welfare assessment. It is designed to systematically analyse information gathered from zoo personnel in order to highlight areas of welfare risk, as well as areas that are performing well and areas requiring further investigation. A trial was conducted on three zoos over three years. Results of the trial suggest the process developed is practical and effective in identifying areas of welfare risk in a wide range of species in a zoo setting. It represents a further step towards achieving high-level animal welfare in zoos by integrating animal welfare as an institutional priority. The more zoos that employ such strategies, the greater the ability of the sector to advance the welfare of the animals in their care.

ACS Style

Sally Sherwen; Lauren M. Hemsworth; Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Amanda Embury; David J. Mellor. An Animal Welfare Risk Assessment Process for Zoos. Animals 2018, 8, 130 .

AMA Style

Sally Sherwen, Lauren M. Hemsworth, Ngaio J. Beausoleil, Amanda Embury, David J. Mellor. An Animal Welfare Risk Assessment Process for Zoos. Animals. 2018; 8 (8):130.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sally Sherwen; Lauren M. Hemsworth; Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Amanda Embury; David J. Mellor. 2018. "An Animal Welfare Risk Assessment Process for Zoos." Animals 8, no. 8: 130.

Review
Published: 25 June 2018 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Conceptual frameworks for understanding animal welfare scientifically are widely influential. An early “biological functioning” framework still influences expert opinions prepared for Courts hearing animal cruelty cases, despite deficiencies in it being revealed by the later emergence and wide scientific adoption of an “affective state” framework. According to “biological functioning” precepts, indices of negative welfare states should predominantly be physical and/or clinical and any that refer to animals’ supposed subjective experiences, i.e., their “affective states”, should be excluded. However, “affective state” precepts, which have secure affective neuroscience and aligned animal behaviour science foundations, show that behavioural indices may be utilised to credibly identify negative welfare outcomes in terms of negative subjective experiences, or affects. It is noted that the now very wide scientific acceptance of the “affective state” framework is entirely consistent with the current extensive international recognition that animals of welfare significance are “sentient” beings. A long list of negative affects is discussed and each one is described as a prelude to updating the concept of “suffering” or “distress”, often referred to in animal welfare legislation and prosecutions for alleged ill-treatment of animals. The Five Domains Model for assessing and grading animal welfare compromise is then discussed, highlighting that it incorporates a coherent amalgamation of “biological functioning” and “affective state” precepts into its operational features. That is followed by examples of severe-to-very-severe ill-treatment of dogs. These include inescapable psychological and/or physical abuse or mistreatment, excessively restrictive or otherwise detrimental housing or holding conditions, and/or seriously inadequate provision of the necessities of life, in each case drawing attention to specific affects that such ill-treatment generates. It is concluded that experts should frame their opinions in ways that include negative affective outcomes. Moreover, the cogency of such analyses should be drawn to the attention of the Judiciary when they are deliberating on suffering in animals, thereby providing a basis for them to move from a current heavy reliance on physical and/or clinical indices of cruelty or neglect towards including in their decisions careful evaluations of animals’ negative affective experiences.

ACS Style

Rebecca A. Ledger; David J. Mellor. Forensic Use of the Five Domains Model for Assessing Suffering in Cases of Animal Cruelty. Animals 2018, 8, 101 .

AMA Style

Rebecca A. Ledger, David J. Mellor. Forensic Use of the Five Domains Model for Assessing Suffering in Cases of Animal Cruelty. Animals. 2018; 8 (7):101.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rebecca A. Ledger; David J. Mellor. 2018. "Forensic Use of the Five Domains Model for Assessing Suffering in Cases of Animal Cruelty." Animals 8, no. 7: 101.

Opinion
Published: 31 May 2018 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Bans or restrictions on non-therapeutic tail docking of canine puppies are becoming more widespread. Justifications for constraining this practice have usually referred to hindrances to the tail contributing to unambiguous communication between different dogs, the marked acute pain presumed to be experienced during the docking procedure itself, the subsequent occurrence of chronic pain and heightened pain sensitivity, and other harmful complications. The present re-examination of these matters led to the following conclusions: first, the contribution the tail makes to canine communication has been seriously underestimated; second, the capacity of puppies to consciously experience any pain at the early ages docking is usually conducted has been markedly overestimated; third, the probability that docking causes significant chronic pain and an ongoing heightened pain sensitivity is reaffirmed as high; and fourth, other harmful effects are apparent, but their prevalence is not well documented. Nevertheless, it is concluded that, overall, the life-long negative welfare impacts of tail docking in puppies, especially impacts associated with impaired communication, as also the occurrence of chronic pain and heightened pain sensitivity, still strongly justify banning or restricting docking unless it is undertaken for therapeutic purposes. Laws, regulations and professional standards increasingly aim to ban or restrict non-therapeutic tail docking in canine puppies. These constraints have usually been justified by reference to loss of tail participation in communication between dogs, the acute pain presumed to be caused during docking itself, subsequent experiences of chronic pain and heightened pain sensitivity, and the occurrence of other complications. These areas are reconsidered here. First, a scientifically robust examination of the dynamic functional foundations, sensory components and key features of body language that are integral to canine communication shows that the role of the tail has been greatly underestimated. More specifically, it shows that tail behaviour is so embedded in canine communication that docking can markedly impede unambiguous interactions between different dogs and between dogs and people. These interactions include the expression of wide ranges of both negative and positive emotions, moods and intentions that are of daily significance for dog welfare. Moreover, all docked dogs may experience these impediments throughout their lives, which challenges assertions by opponents to such bans or restrictions that the tail is a dispensable appendage. Second, and in contrast, a re-examination of the sensory capacities of canine puppies reveals that they cannot consciously experience acute or chronic pain during at least the first week after birth, which is when they are usually docked. The contrary view is based on questionable between-species extrapolation of information about pain from neurologically mature newborns such as...

ACS Style

David J. Mellor. Tail Docking of Canine Puppies: Reassessment of the Tail’s Role in Communication, the Acute Pain Caused by Docking and Interpretation of Behavioural Responses. Animals 2018, 8, 82 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor. Tail Docking of Canine Puppies: Reassessment of the Tail’s Role in Communication, the Acute Pain Caused by Docking and Interpretation of Behavioural Responses. Animals. 2018; 8 (6):82.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor. 2018. "Tail Docking of Canine Puppies: Reassessment of the Tail’s Role in Communication, the Acute Pain Caused by Docking and Interpretation of Behavioural Responses." Animals 8, no. 6: 82.

Review
Published: 09 August 2017 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

In accord with contemporary animal welfare science understanding, the Five Domains Model has a significant focus on subjective experiences, known as affects, which collectively contribute to an animal’s overall welfare state. Operationally, the focus of the Model is on the presence or absence of various internal physical/functional states and external circumstances that give rise to welfare-relevant negative and/or positive mental experiences, i.e., affects. The internal states and external circumstances of animals are evaluated systematically by referring to each of the first four domains of the Model, designated “Nutrition”, “Environment”, “Health” and “Behaviour”. Then affects, considered carefully and cautiously to be generated by factors in these domains, are accumulated into the fifth domain, designated “Mental State”. The scientific foundations of this operational procedure, published in detail elsewhere, are described briefly here, and then seven key ways the Model may be applied to the assessment and management of animal welfare are considered. These applications have the following beneficial objectives—they (1) specify key general foci for animal welfare management; (2) highlight the foundations of specific welfare management objectives; (3) identify previously unrecognised features of poor and good welfare; (4) enable monitoring of responses to specific welfare-focused remedial interventions and/or maintenance activities; (5) facilitate qualitative grading of particular features of welfare compromise and/or enhancement; (6) enable both prospective and retrospective animal welfare assessments to be conducted; and, (7) provide adjunct information to support consideration of quality of life evaluations in the context of end-of-life decisions. However, also noted is the importance of not overstating what utilisation of the Model can achieve.

ACS Style

David J. Mellor. Operational Details of the Five Domains Model and Its Key Applications to the Assessment and Management of Animal Welfare. Animals 2017, 7, 60 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor. Operational Details of the Five Domains Model and Its Key Applications to the Assessment and Management of Animal Welfare. Animals. 2017; 7 (12):60.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor. 2017. "Operational Details of the Five Domains Model and Its Key Applications to the Assessment and Management of Animal Welfare." Animals 7, no. 12: 60.

Review
Published: 26 May 2017 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Horses engaged in strenuous exercise display physiological responses that approach the upper functional limits of key organ systems, in particular their cardiorespiratory systems. Maximum athletic performance is therefore vulnerable to factors that diminish these functional capacities, and such impairment might also lead to horses experiencing unpleasant respiratory sensations, i.e., breathlessness. The aim of this review is to use existing literature on equine cardiorespiratory physiology and athletic performance to evaluate the potential for various types of breathlessness to occur in exercising horses. In addition, we investigate the influence of management factors such as rein and bit use and of respiratory pathology on the likelihood and intensity of equine breathlessness occurring during exercise. In ridden horses, rein use that reduces the jowl angle, sometimes markedly, and conditions that partially obstruct the nasopharynx and/or larynx, impair airflow in the upper respiratory tract and lead to increased flow resistance. The associated upper airway pressure changes, transmitted to the lower airways, may have pathophysiological sequelae in the alveolae, which, in their turn, may increase airflow resistance in the lower airways and impede respiratory gas exchange. Other sequelae include decreases in respiratory minute volume and worsening of the hypoxaemia, hypercapnia and acidaemia commonly observed in healthy horses during strenuous exercise. These and other factors are implicated in the potential for ridden horses to experience three forms of breathlessness—”unpleasant respiratory effort”, “air hunger” and “chest tightness”—which arise when there is a mismatch between a heightened ventilatory drive and the adequacy of the respiratory response. It is not known to what extent, if at all, such mismatches would occur in strenuously exercising horses unhampered by low jowl angles or by pathophysiological changes at any level of the respiratory tract. However, different combinations of the three types of breathlessness seem much more likely to occur when pathophysiological conditions significantly reduce maximal athletic performance. Finally, most horses exhibit clear behavioural evidence of aversion to a bit in their mouths, varying from the bit being a mild irritant to very painful. This in itself is a significant animal welfare issue that should be addressed. A further major point is the potential for bits to disrupt the maintenance of negative pressure in the oropharynx, which apparently acts to prevent the soft palate from rising and obstructing the nasopharynx. The untoward respiratory outcomes and poor athletic performance due to this and other obstructions are well established, and suggest the potential for affected animals to experience significant intensities of breathlessness. Bitless bridle use may reduce or eliminate such effects. However, direct comparisons of the cardiorespiratory dynamics and the extent of any respiratory pathophysiology in horses wearing bitted and bitless bridles have not been conducted. Such studies would be helpful in confirming, or otherwise, the claimed potential benefits of bitless bridle use.

ACS Style

David J. Mellor; Ngaio J. Beausoleil. Equine Welfare during Exercise: An Evaluation of Breathing, Breathlessness and Bridles. Animals 2017, 7, 41 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor, Ngaio J. Beausoleil. Equine Welfare during Exercise: An Evaluation of Breathing, Breathlessness and Bridles. Animals. 2017; 7 (12):41.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor; Ngaio J. Beausoleil. 2017. "Equine Welfare during Exercise: An Evaluation of Breathing, Breathlessness and Bridles." Animals 7, no. 12: 41.

Review
Published: 23 September 2016 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

A Five Provisions/Welfare Aims paradigm has been formulated as a coherent alternative to the Five Freedoms. It retains the memorable simplicity of the original paradigm and is linked to it, but avoids the acknowledged complications that arise by using the term “freedoms”. Also, it accommodates current scientific understanding of animal welfare, is easily understood and provides guidance on beneficial objectives for animal welfare management. It is an evocative and engaging paradigm anticipated to be of particular interest to non-specialist members of the lay public who are concerned about animal welfare. Although the Five Freedoms paradigm has been very influential in shaping animal welfare thinking for the last two decades, it has two key disadvantages. First, the focus on “freedom” from a range of negative experiences and states has been misunderstood in a number of quarters to mean that complete freedom from these experiences and states is possible, when in fact the best that can be achieved is for them to be minimised. Second, the major focus of the Freedoms on negative experiences and states is now seen to be a disadvantage in view of current understanding that animal welfare management should also include the promotion of positive experiences and states. The challenge therefore was to formulate a paradigm that overcame these two main problems and yet was straightforward enough to be accessible to non-specialists, including members of the lay public who are interested in animal welfare. This was achieved by highlighting the Five Provisions, originally aligned with the Five Freedoms, but now updated to direct welfare management towards activities that both minimise negative experiences or states and promote positive experiences or states as specified by particular Animal Welfare Aims assigned to each Provision. Aspects of the four welfare principles from the European Welfare Quality assessment system (WQ®) and elements of all domains of the Five Domains Model for animal welfare assessment have been incorporated into the new Five Provisions/Welfare Aims paradigm. Thus, the paradigm is easily understood and provides clear guidance on beneficial objectives for animal welfare management. It is anticipated that the paradigm will have application to many species found in a wide range of circumstances.

ACS Style

David J. Mellor. Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” by Updating the “Five Provisions” and Introducing Aligned “Animal Welfare Aims”. Animals 2016, 6, 59 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor. Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” by Updating the “Five Provisions” and Introducing Aligned “Animal Welfare Aims”. Animals. 2016; 6 (10):59.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor. 2016. "Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” by Updating the “Five Provisions” and Introducing Aligned “Animal Welfare Aims”." Animals 6, no. 10: 59.

Review
Published: 21 September 2016 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The Five Domains Model is now increasingly used to assess the welfare status of a wide range of species in markedly different circumstances. Particular strengths are that the Model facilitates structured, systematic and comprehensive evaluations of animals’ negative and positive mental experiences, the overall balance of which underlies their welfare status or quality of life. Importantly, the Model also clarifies the specific internal and external factors that give rise to those experiences. The welfare evaluation published here is the first to use the most up-to-date version of the Model, and stands as a detailed example that may assist others undertaking such welfare evaluations in other species and contexts. Moreover, it is the first such evaluation of a companion animal. It employs a fictitious scenario involving a working farm dog before, during and after it sustains a serious hind leg injury requiring amputation and its subsequent rehoming as a pet. A wide range of negative and positive experiences are graded, interactions between them are revealed, and the balance between negative and positive states at different stages of the scenario is described. Such Model evaluations can highlight current practices that merit re-evaluation. More generally, when major welfare issues are identified, use of the Model could enhance expert witness participation in related prosecutions by highlighting scientifically supported connections between indicative physical/functional states and behaviours and their associated negative experiences in ill-treated animals. Five Domains Model evaluations can also facilitate quality of life assessments and end-of-life decisions. The present structured, systematic and comprehensive welfare evaluation of an injured working farm dog using the Five Domains Model is of interest in its own right. It is also an example for others wanting to apply the Model to welfare evaluations in different species and contexts. Six stages of a fictitious scenario involving the dog are considered: (1) its on-farm circumstances before one hind leg is injured; (2) its entanglement in barbed wire, cutting it free and transporting it to a veterinary clinic; (3) the initial veterinary examination and overnight stay; (4) amputation of the limb and immediate post-operative recovery; (5) its first four weeks after rehoming to a lifestyle block; and (6) its subsequent life as an amputee and pet. Not all features of the scenario represent average-to-good practice; indeed, some have been selected to indicate poor practice. It is shown how the Model can draw attention to areas of animal welfare concern and, importantly, to how welfare enhancement may be impeded or facilitated. Also illustrated is how the welfare implications of a sequence of events can be traced and evaluated, and, in relation to specific situations, how the degrees of welfare compromise and enhancement may be graded. In addition, the choice of a companion animal, contrasting its...

ACS Style

Katherine E. Littlewood; David J. Mellor. Changes in the Welfare of an Injured Working Farm Dog Assessed Using the Five Domains Model. Animals 2016, 6, 58 .

AMA Style

Katherine E. Littlewood, David J. Mellor. Changes in the Welfare of an Injured Working Farm Dog Assessed Using the Five Domains Model. Animals. 2016; 6 (9):58.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Katherine E. Littlewood; David J. Mellor. 2016. "Changes in the Welfare of an Injured Working Farm Dog Assessed Using the Five Domains Model." Animals 6, no. 9: 58.

Opinion
Published: 14 March 2016 in Animals
Reads 0
Downloads 0

The Five Freedoms have had major impact on animal welfare thinking internationally. However, despite clear initial statements that the words ‘freedom from’ should indicate ‘as free as possible from’, the Freedoms have come to be represented as absolute or fundamental freedoms, even rights, by some animal advocate and other groups. Moreover, a marked increase in scientific understanding over the last two decades shows that the Freedoms do not capture the more nuanced knowledge of the biological processes that is germane to understanding animal welfare and which is now available to guide its management. For example, the named negative experiences of thirst, hunger, discomfort and pain, and others identified subsequently, including breathlessness, nausea, dizziness, debility, weakness and sickness, can never be eliminated, merely temporarily neutralised. Each one is a genetically embedded element that motivates animals to behave in particular ways to obtain specific life-sustaining resources, avoid or reduce physical harm or facilitate recovery from infection or injury. Their undoubted negativity creates a necessary sense of urgency to respond, without which animals would not survive. Also, the temporary neutralisation of these survival-critical affects does not in and of itself generate positive experience. This questions the commonly held assumption that good animal welfare will result when these internally generated negative affects are minimised. Animals may also experience other negative affects that include anxiety, fear, panic, frustration, anger, helplessness, loneliness, boredom and depression. These situation-related affects reflect animals’ perceptions of their external circumstances. Although they are elicited by threatening, cramped, barren and/or isolated conditions, they can often be replaced by positive affects when animals are kept with congenial others in spacious, stimulus-rich and safe environments which provide opportunities for them to engage in behaviours they find rewarding. These behaviours may include environment-focused exploration and food acquisition activities as well as animal-to-animal interactive activities, all of which can generate various forms of comfort, pleasure, interest, confidence and a sense of control. Animal welfare management should aim to reduce the intensity of survival-critical negative affects to tolerable levels that nevertheless still elicit the required behaviours, and should also provide opportunities for animals to behave in ways they find rewarding, noting that poor management of survival-critical affects reduces animals’ motivation to utilize such rewarding opportunities. This biologically more accurate understanding provides support for reviewing the adequacy of provisions in current codes of welfare or practice in order to ensure that animals are given greater opportunities to experience positive welfare states. The purpose is to help animals to have lives worth living, which is not possible when the predominant focus of such codes is on survival-critical measures. Finally, an updated characterisation of animal welfare that incorporates this more accurate understanding is presented.

ACS Style

David J. Mellor. Updating Animal Welfare Thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” towards “A Life Worth Living”. Animals 2016, 6, 21 .

AMA Style

David J. Mellor. Updating Animal Welfare Thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” towards “A Life Worth Living”. Animals. 2016; 6 (3):21.

Chicago/Turabian Style

David J. Mellor. 2016. "Updating Animal Welfare Thinking: Moving beyond the “Five Freedoms” towards “A Life Worth Living”." Animals 6, no. 3: 21.

Review articles
Published: 14 August 2014 in New Zealand Veterinary Journal
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Affective neuroscience, incorporating neurophysiology and neuropsychology, is providing increasing evidence that certain behaviours of animals may be interpreted in terms of what they are intending to achieve, i.e. their goals. It is also providing evidence that allows inferences to be made about the affective contents of some goal-directed behaviours. These neuroscience-supported inferences are aligned with recommendations based on prior behaviour-based investigations of animals' preferences, aversions and priorities, and these observations together support the cautious use of particular behaviours to infer what the accompanying affects may be. In this review, therefore, some attention is given to negative affects and their relationships to poor animal welfare, but the primary focus is the positive affects animals may experience when they successfully engage in rewarding goal-directed behaviours, encapsulated in the concept of positive affective engagement. The review draws together reports of environment-focused and animal-to-animal interactive behaviours observed in a range of species and under diverse circumstances in order to illustrate the likely widespread occurrence of the positive affects that may accompany them. Particular consideration is given to affects that are potentially associated with some aspects of exploration and food acquisition in stimulus rich or impoverished environments, and to those that may be associated with aspects of the affiliative interactions of bonding or bond affirmation, maternal care, play and sexual activity. It is concluded that animals given the opportunity to engage in such activities may experience some positive affects. However, the intensity of an animal's experience of particular positive affects is likely to range from zero to very high because the associated behaviours occur intermittently, variation may occur during different phases of a goal-directed behaviour, and other positive or negative affects experienced at the same time may have greater impact. As good welfare is achieved both by minimising negative affects and promoting positive ones and as conscious sentient animals may be expected to have an interest in experiencing as little pain and as much pleasure as possible, it is argued that there is an ethical obligation to take practical steps to help them to achieve these outcomes. Such steps would include providing them with opportunities to express more behaviours that are associated with rewarding or satisfying experiences understood in terms of positive affective engagement.

ACS Style

D J Mellor. Positive animal welfare states and encouraging environment-focused and animal-to-animal interactive behaviours. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 2014, 63, 9 -16.

AMA Style

D J Mellor. Positive animal welfare states and encouraging environment-focused and animal-to-animal interactive behaviours. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 2014; 63 (1):9-16.

Chicago/Turabian Style

D J Mellor. 2014. "Positive animal welfare states and encouraging environment-focused and animal-to-animal interactive behaviours." New Zealand Veterinary Journal 63, no. 1: 9-16.

Review articles
Published: 14 August 2014 in New Zealand Veterinary Journal
Reads 0
Downloads 0

Developments in affective neuroscience and behavioural science during the last 10–15 years have together made it increasingly apparent that sentient animals are potentially much more sensitive to their environmental and social circumstances than was previously thought to be the case. It therefore seems likely that both the range and magnitude of welfare trade-offs that occur when animals are managed for human purposes have been underestimated even when minimalistic but arguably well-intentioned attempts have been made to maintain high levels of welfare. In light of these neuroscience-supported behaviour-based insights, the present review considers the extent to which the use of currently available reference standards might draw attention to these previously neglected areas of concern. It is concluded that the natural living orientation cannot provide an all-embracing or definitive welfare benchmark because of its primary focus on behavioural freedom. However assessments of this type, supported by neuroscience insights into behavioural motivation, may now carry greater weight when used to identify management practices that should be avoided, discontinued or substantially modified. Using currently accepted baseline standards as welfare reference points may result in small changes being accorded greater significance than would be the case if they were compared with higher standards, and this could slow the progress towards better levels of welfare. On the other hand, using “what animals want” as a reference standard has the appeal of focusing on the specific resources or conditions the animals would choose themselves and can potentially improve their welfare more quickly than the approach of making small increments above baseline standards. It is concluded that the cautious use of these approaches in different combinations could lead to recommendations that would more effectively promote positive welfare states in hitherto neglected areas of concern.

ACS Style

Dj Mellor. Positive animal welfare states and reference standards for welfare assessment. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 2014, 63, 17 -23.

AMA Style

Dj Mellor. Positive animal welfare states and reference standards for welfare assessment. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 2014; 63 (1):17-23.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Dj Mellor. 2014. "Positive animal welfare states and reference standards for welfare assessment." New Zealand Veterinary Journal 63, no. 1: 17-23.

Journal article
Published: 01 June 2012 in Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Reads 0
Downloads 0
ACS Style

Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Dominique Blache; Kevin J. Stafford; David J. Mellor; Alasdair D.L. Noble. Selection for temperament in sheep: Domain-general and context-specific traits. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 2012, 139, 74 -85.

AMA Style

Ngaio J. Beausoleil, Dominique Blache, Kevin J. Stafford, David J. Mellor, Alasdair D.L. Noble. Selection for temperament in sheep: Domain-general and context-specific traits. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2012; 139 (1):74-85.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ngaio J. Beausoleil; Dominique Blache; Kevin J. Stafford; David J. Mellor; Alasdair D.L. Noble. 2012. "Selection for temperament in sheep: Domain-general and context-specific traits." Applied Animal Behaviour Science 139, no. 1: 74-85.

Review
Published: 01 January 2012 in New Zealand Veterinary Journal
Reads 0
Downloads 0

This paper presents a rationale that may significantly boost the drive to promote positive welfare states in animals. The rationale is based largely, but not exclusively, on an experimentally supported neuropsychological understanding of relationships between emotions and behaviour, an understanding that has not yet been incorporated into animal welfare science thinking. Reference is made to major elements of the neural/cognitive foundations of motivational drives that energise and direct particular behaviours and their related subjective or emotional experiences. These experiences are generated in part by sensory inputs that reflect the animal's internal functional state and by neural processing linked to the animal's perception of its external circumstances. The integrated subjective or emotional outcome of these inputs corresponds to the animal's welfare status. The internally generated subjective experiences represent motivational urges or drives that are predominantly negative and include breathlessness, thirst, hunger and pain. They are generated by, and elicit specific behaviours designed to correct, imbalances in the animal's internal functional state. Externally generated subjective experiences are said to be integral to the operation of interacting ‘action-orientated systems’ that give rise to particular behaviours and their negative or positive emotional contents. These action-orientated systems, described in neuropsychological terms, give rise to negative emotions that include fear, anger and panic, and positive emotions that include comfort, vitality, euphoria and playfulness. It is argued that early thinking about animal welfare management focused mainly on minimising disturbances to the internal functional states that generate associated unpleasant motivational urges or drives. This strategy produced animal welfare benefits, but at best it could only lift a poor net welfare status to a neutral one. In contrast, strategies designed to manipulate the emotional action-orientated systems have the potential to replace the negative emotions generated within those systems with positive ones, and thereby may lift a poor net state of welfare beyond the neutral point to a net positive state. It is hoped that the analysis presented here will enhance the drive to promote positive welfare states by providing cogent and convincing neuropsychological support for the formulation of additional, more directed welfare code recommendations and standards that focus on the animal's behaviour.

ACS Style

D J Mellor. Animal emotions, behaviour and the promotion of positive welfare states. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 2012, 60, 1 -8.

AMA Style

D J Mellor. Animal emotions, behaviour and the promotion of positive welfare states. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 2012; 60 (1):1-8.

Chicago/Turabian Style

D J Mellor. 2012. "Animal emotions, behaviour and the promotion of positive welfare states." New Zealand Veterinary Journal 60, no. 1: 1-8.

Journal article
Published: 15 December 2011 in Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Reads 0
Downloads 0
ACS Style

Kevin J. Stafford; David J. Mellor. Addressing the pain associated with disbudding and dehorning in cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 2011, 135, 226 -231.

AMA Style

Kevin J. Stafford, David J. Mellor. Addressing the pain associated with disbudding and dehorning in cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 2011; 135 (3):226-231.

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kevin J. Stafford; David J. Mellor. 2011. "Addressing the pain associated with disbudding and dehorning in cattle." Applied Animal Behaviour Science 135, no. 3: 226-231.