Evoked potentials in the Atlantic cod following putatively innocuous and putatively noxious electrical stimulation: a minimally invasive approach

Aspects of peripheral and central nociception have previously been studied through recording of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) to putative noxious stimuli in specific brain regions in a few freshwater fish species. In the present study, we describe a novel, minimally invasive method for recording SEPs from the central nervous system of the Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). Cutaneous electric stimulation of the tail in 15 fish elicited SEPs at all stimulus intensities (2, 5, 10 and 20 mA) with quantitative properties corresponding to stimulus intensity. In contrast to previous fish studies, the methodological approach used in Atlantic cod in the current study uncovered a number of additional responses that could originate from multiple brain regions. Several of these responses were specific to stimulation at the highest stimulus intensities, possibly representing qualitative differences in central processing between somatosensory and nociceptive stimuli

Behavioural indicators of welfare in farmed fish

Behaviour represents a reaction to the environment as fish perceive it and is therefore a key element of fish welfare. This review summarises the main findings on how behavioural changes have been used to assess welfare in farmed fish, using both functional and feeling-based approaches. Changes in foraging behaviour, ventilatory activity, aggression, individual and group swimming behaviour, stereotypic and abnormal behaviour have been linked with acute and chronic stressors in aquaculture and can therefore be regarded as likely indicators of poor welfare. On the contrary, measurements of exploratory behaviour, feed anticipatory activity and reward-related operant behaviour are beginning to be considered as indicators of positive emotions and welfare in fish. Despite the lack of scientific agreement about the existence of sentience in fish, the possibility that they are capable of both positive and negative emotions may contribute to the development of new strategies (e. g. environmental enrichment) to promote good welfare. Numerous studies that use behavioural indicators of welfare show that behavioural changes can be interpreted as either good or poor welfare depending on the fish species. It is therefore essential to understand the species-specific biology before drawing any conclusions in relation to welfare. In addition, different individuals within the same species may exhibit divergent coping strategies towards stressors, and what is tolerated by some individuals may be detrimental to others. Therefore, the assessment of welfare in a few individuals may not represent the average welfare of a group and vice versa. This underlines the need to develop on-farm, operational behavioural welfare indicators that can be easily used to assess not only the individual welfare but also the welfare of the whole group (e. g. spatial distribution). With the ongoing development of video technology and image processing, the on-farm surveillance of behaviour may in the near future represent a low-cost, noninvasive tool to assess the welfare of farmed fish.Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia, Portugal [SFRH/BPD/42015/2007]info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Fish Intelligence, Sentience and Ethics

Fish are one of the most highly utilised vertebrate taxa by humans; they are harvested from wild stocks as part of global fishing industries, grown under intensive aquaculture conditions, are the most common pet and are widely used for scientific research. But fish are seldom afforded the same level of compassion or welfare as warm-blooded vertebrates. Part of the problem is the large gap between people’s perception of fish intelligence and the scientific reality. This is an important issue because public perception guides government policy. The perception of an animal’s intelligence often drives our decision whether or not to include them in our moral circle. From a welfare perspective, most researchers would suggest that if an animal is sentient, then it can most likely suffer and should therefore be offered some form of formal protection. There has been a debate about fish welfare for decades which centres on the question of whether they are sentient or conscious. The implications for affording the same level of protection to fish as other vertebrates are great, not least because of fishing-related industries. Here, I review the current state of knowledge of fish cognition starting with their sensory perception and moving on to cognition. The review reveals that fish perception and cognitive abilities often match or exceed other vertebrates. A review of the evidence for pain perception strongly suggests that fish experience pain in a manner similar to the rest of the vertebrates. Although scientists cannot provide a definitive answer on the level of consciousness for any nonhuman vertebrate, the extensive evidence of fish behavioural and cognitive sophistication and pain perception suggests that best practice would be to lend fish the same level of protection as any other vertebrate

A brief look into the origins of fish welfare science

Every year, humans kill or injure trillions of fishes in fisheries, recreational fishing, aquaculture, and through the destruction or contamination of their habitats. However, until recently fish welfare has been paid little attention. The recent, at least partial, inclusion of fish within the moral circle can be seen as a natural/logical consequence of the increased attention paid to animal welfare in general, and in particular to the welfare of farmed fish in the rapidly growing intensive fish farming industry. The concern for fish welfare was first raised by animal protection groups in the early 1990s, and by the end of that decade, fish welfare had started to receive attention from scientists, food authorities, politicians, and the aquaculture industry. After the turn of the millennium, fish welfare blossomed into a research topic and became a prioritized and integrated part of animal welfare legislation in Europe. This chapter tells the story about the rise of animal welfare as a topic of concern, and especially fish welfare science, including the controversy concerning pain and consciousness in fish

Diplotaxis glabrimargo (dorsal)

Paratipo de Diplotaxis glabrimargo Vaurie y Cazie

Ethical considerations in fish research

Fishes are used in a wide range of scientific studies, from conservation research with potential benefits to the species used to biomedical research with potential human benefits. Fish research can take place in both laboratories and field environments and methods used represent a continuum from non-invasive observations, handling, through to experimental manipulation. While some countries have legislation or guidance regarding the use of fish in research, many do not and there exists a diversity of scientific opinions on the sentience of fish and how we determine welfare. Nevertheless, there is a growing pressure on the scientific community to take more responsibility for the animals they work with through maximising the benefits of their research to humans or animals while minimising welfare or survival costs to their study animals. In this review, we focus primarily on the refinement of common methods used in fish research based on emerging knowledge with the aim of improving the welfare of fish used in scientific studies. We consider the use of anaesthetics and analgesics and how we mark individuals for identification purposes. We highlight the main ethical concerns facing researchers in both laboratory and field environments and identify areas that need urgent future research. We hope that this review will help inform those who wish to refine their ethical practices and stimulate thought among fish researchers for further avenues of refinement. Improved ethics and welfare of fishes will inevitably lead to increased scientific rigour and is in the best interests of both fishes and scientists