Percepção de equipes laboratoriais quanto a questões de bem-estar animal

As equipes laboratoriais controlam diversas características do ambiente dos animais utilizados em pesquisas. Portanto, suas atitudes têm grande influência no bem-estar animal (BEA) e nos resultados obtidos. Buscou-se verificar o conhecimento e a percepção dessas equipes em relação a questões de BEA. Os dados foram coletados por meio de um questionário online composto por 22 questões abertas e 23 fechadas. As respostas são referentes a 62 participantes de diversas instituições de pesquisa brasileiras. Dezesseis (25,8%) não receberam treinamento para exercer suas funções, e 11 (18,0%) realizavam ou coordenavam procedimentos com potencial para causar dor ou morte. O principal fator limitante relatado para o uso de animais em pesquisas foi referente a questões éticas (38; 63,3%). Todos declararam conhecer o significado do termo BEA; porém, a maioria dos conceitos expressos foi de forma parcial (32; 64,0%). Tais resultados podem estar relacionados ao caráter optativo ou à indisponibilidade do ensino de BEA na maioria dos cursos de graduação no Brasil. Os animais vertebrados foram percebidos pelos respondentes como portadores de alto grau de senciência. Espécies em contato social e afetivo com os seres humanos foram vistas como mais sencientes que outros grupos. O número de respondentes interessados em um projeto de enriquecimento ambiental (34; 69,4%) sugere preocupação com o BEA. Os resultados apresentados podem subsidiar a localização de pontos críticos de BEA em laboratórios brasileiros e indicam possibilidades para melhoria no conhecimento científico de questões centrais relativas ao BEA

Behavioral responses of sheep submitted to human presence and brushing

Positive emotional states have been recently studied in farm animals. We investigated the perception of thirty-eight Romane ewes submitted to the presence of a familiar observer (H) and brushing by a familiar observer (B). Sheep belonged to two genetic lines, more (R+) and less (R-) reactive to temporary social separation. Body postures, head orientation, ear changes and postures, eye aperture, tail moves and ingestion were assessed. Data were analyzed using generalized linear models, considering generalized estimating equations and potential intra-animal correlation. The effects of treatment, genetic line and phase (2.5 min pre-, 3.0 min during and 2.5 min post-treatment) were included in the models, in addition to their interactions. Significant treatment and phase interactions were observed for most indicators (P<0.05). It was noted that H ewes tended to show less body posture changes in the pre-treatment phase (0.50±0.23) than B ewes (2.06±0.78), whereas during the treatment, the opposite was observed (P<0.05). During the treatment, H ewes showed higher number of head orientation changes (14.08±2.32) than B sheep (2.71±1.28) (P<0.01), suggesting that B sheep were more relaxed during brushing. In addition, for R+ ewes, H sheep showed more head orientation changes (16.25±2.44) than B sheep (7.07±1.31) (P<0.01). During the treatment, a higher number of ear changes was found for the H group (P<0.01), and R+ ewes showed higher number of ear changes (10.83±1.06) than R- ewes (7.68±0.87) (P<0.05). Higher proportion of raised up or asymmetrical ear posture was noted pre- (0.73±0.05) than during the treatments (0.53±0.06), in which the horizontal ear was performed for longer (P<0.05). Among R+ sheep, H sheep showed raised up or asymmetrical ear postures for longer (0.63±0.06) than B sheep (0.45±0.05) (P<0.05). It was also found that H ewes had lower proportion of closed or half-closed eyes (0.15±0.04) than B ewes during brushing (0.53±0.06) (P<0.01), supporting the fact that brushed sheep experienced a relaxing state. In addition, overall, R+ sheep showed closed or half-closed eyes for longer (0.25±0.04) in comparison with R- sheep (0.13±0.03) (P<0.01). Brushed ewes also wagged their tails for longer that non-brushed sheep mainly during (B: 0.16±0.05; H: 0.01±0.003) and after the treatments (0.02±0.009; 0.007±0.002) (P<0.01). Among R+ sheep, B ewes spent more time ruminating (0.48±0.08) than H ewes (0.12±0.06) (P<0.01). All the behavioral indicators strongly suggest that both treatments induced a relaxing state in sheep, especially during brushing. Comparing more and less reactive sheep provided significant differences which warrant further studies