Recognizing and addressing ethical conflicts is an emerging concern for veterinarians. Veterinary students (N = 284) from four US schools were surveyed regarding their opinions on ethical dilemmas encountered by veterinarians and the benefits of ethics instruction. The majority of respondents had encountered all clinical scenarios that may be associated with ethical dilemmas that were provided. The most common ethical dilemma experienced was compromise of patient care because of financial limitations. Students with at least 12 months of experience were more likely to believe that practitioners encounter ethical dilemmas regularly. Although 92% of 271 respondents indicated that veterinarians should prioritize patient interests when the interests of clients and patients conflict, 84% of respondents reported that veterinarians most often prioritize client interests. Most (78%) respondents indicated having received training in ethical theories and approaches to address ethical dilemmas. The majority of respondents agreed that they feel better prepared to identify (80%) and address (55%) ethical dilemmas as a result of their ethics training. Most respondents (81%) identified experiencing moral stress in relation to how animals were treated. Only 46% of respondents reported receiving training in tools for coping with moral stress. Most of these respondents (54%) agreed that such training would be effective in helping to manage moral stress. Results suggested that educators should prepare students for the contrast in advocacy preferences they are apt to encounter when they enter practice. It is recommended that ethics training and tools for coping with moral stress be core components of the veterinary curriculum.

There is a need for novel mechanical devices for dispatching poultry on farm following the introduction of EU Regulation (EC) no. 1099/2009 On the Protection of Animals at the Time of Killing. We examined three novel mechanical killing devices: Modified Armadillo, Modified Rabbit Zinger, a novel mechanical cervical dislocation device; and traditional manual cervical dislocation. The four killing methods were tested on 230 chickens across four batches. We measured behavioural, electroencephalogram and post-mortem outcomes in anesthetized laying hens and broilers at two life stages (juveniles and adults/slaughter age). Graeco Latin-Square designs systematically randomized killing treatment, bird type, age and kill order. All birds were lightly anaesthetized immediately prior to the killing treatment with inhalation of Sevoflurane. The novel mechanical cervical dislocation method had the highest kill success rate (single application attempt only, with no signs of recovery) of a mechanical method (96%). The Modified Armadillo was the least reliable with 49% kill success. Spectral analysis of electroencephalogram signals at 2 s intervals for successfully killed birds only revealed progressive decreases in median frequency alongside increases in total power. Later, total power decreased as the birds exhibited isoelectric electroencephalogram signal. Latencies to pre-defined spectral ranges associated with unconsciousness showed that birds subjected to manual and novel mechanical cervical dislocation achieved these states sooner than birds subjected to the modified Armadillo. Nevertheless all methods exhibited short latencies (<4 s). The Modified Rabbit Zinger had the shortest duration of reflex persistence for nictitating membrane, pupillary and rhythmic breathing post method application. Of the methods tested, the novel mechanical cervical dislocation device is the most promising mechanical method for killing poultry on-farm based on a range of behavioural, electroencephalogram and anatomical parameters. This device has the potential to fulfil the current need for a mechanical alternative to manual cervical dislocation.

Council Regulation (EC) no. 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at the time of killing restricts the use of manual cervical dislocation in poultry on farms in the European Union (EU) to birds weighing up to 3 kg and 70 birds per person per day. However, few studies have examined whether repeated application of manual cervical dislocation has welfare implications and whether these are dependent on individual operator skill or susceptibility to fatigue. We investigated the effects of repeated application (100 birds at a fixed killing rate of 1 bird per 2 min) and multiple operators on two methods of killing of broilers, laying hens, and turkeys in commercial settings. We compared the efficacy and welfare impact of repeated application of cervical dislocation and a percussive killer (Cash Poultry Killer, CPK), using 12 male stockworkers on three farms (one farm per bird type). Both methods achieved over 96% kill success at the first attempt. The killing methods were equally effective for each bird type and there was no evidence of reduced performance with time and/or bird number. Both methods of killing caused a rapid loss of reflexes, indicating loss of brain function. There was more variation in reflex durations and post-mortem damage in birds killed by cervical dislocation than that found using CPK. High neck dislocation was associated with improved kill success and more rapid loss of reflexes. The CPK caused damage to multiple brain areas with little variation. Overall, the CPK was associated with faster abolition of reflexes, with fewer birds exhibiting them at all, suggestive of better welfare outcomes. However, technical difficulties with the CPK highlighted the advantages of cervical dislocation, which can be performed immediately with no equipment. At the killing rates tested, we did not find evidence to justify the current EU limit on the number of birds that one operator can kill on–farm by manual cervical dislocation.

Laterality can be observed as side biases in locomotory behaviour which, in the horse, manifest inter alia as forelimb preferences, most notably in the gallop. The current study investigated possible leading-leg preferences at the population and individual level in Thoroughbred racehorses (n = 2095) making halt-to-gallop transitions. Videos of flat races in the UK (n = 350) were studied to record, for each horse, the lead-leg preference of the initial stride into gallop from the starting stalls. Races from clockwise (C) and anti-clockwise (AC) tracks were chosen alternately at random to ensure equal representation. Course direction, horse age and sex, position relative to the inside rail and finishing position were also noted. On C courses, the left/right ratio was 1.15, which represents a significant bias to the left (z = –2.29, p = 0.022), while on AC courses it was 0.92 (z = 0.51, p = 0.610). In both course directions, there was no significant difference between winning horses that led with the left leading leg versus the right (C courses, z = –1.32, p = 0.19 and AC courses, z = –0.74, p = 0.46). Of the 2,095 horses studied 51.26% led with their L fore and 48.74% with their R, with no statistically significant difference (z = -1.16, p = 0.25). Therefore, there was no evidence of a population level motor laterality. Additionally, 22 male and 22 female horses were randomly chosen for repeated measures of leading leg preference. A laterality index was calculated for each of the 44 horses studied using the repeated measures: 22 exhibited right laterality (of which two were statistically significant) and 21 exhibited left laterality (eight being statistically significant); one horse was ambilateral. Using these data, left lateralized horses were more strongly lateralized on an individual level than the right lateralized horses (t = 2.28, p = 0.03, DF = 34) and mares were more left lateralized than males (t = 2.4, p = 0.03, DF = 19).