ArticlePDF Available

Animal Welfare and Resistance to Disease: Interaction of Affective States and the Immune System

Frontiers
Frontiers in Veterinary Science
Authors:
  • Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN)

Abstract

Good management and improved standards of animal welfare are discussed as important ways of reducing the risk of infection in farm animals without medication. Increasing evidence from both humans and animals suggests that environments that promote wellbeing over stress and positive over negative emotions can reduce susceptibility to disease and/or lead to milder symptoms. We point out, however, that the relationship between welfare, immunity, and disease is highly complex and we caution against claiming more than the current evidence shows. The accumulating but sometimes equivocal evidence of close links between the brain, the gut microbiome, immunity, and welfare are discussed in the context of the known links between mental and physical health in humans. This evidence not only provides empirical support for the importance of good welfare as preventative medicine in animals but also indicates a variety of mechanisms by which good welfare can directly influence disease resistance. Finally, we outline what still needs to be done to explore the potential preventative effects of good welfare.
PERSPECTIVE
published: 14 June 2022
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.929805
Frontiers in Veterinary Science | www.frontiersin.org 1June 2022 | Volume 9 | Article 929805
Edited by:
Keelin Katherine Mary O’Driscoll,
Teagasc, Ireland
Reviewed by:
Daniel M. Weary,
University of British Columbia, Canada
*Correspondence:
Marian Stamp Dawkins
marian.dawkins@zoo.ox.ac.uk
These authors have contributed
equally to this work
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to
Animal Behavior and Welfare,
a section of the journal
Frontiers in Veterinary Science
Received: 27 April 2022
Accepted: 16 May 2022
Published: 14 June 2022
Citation:
Düpjan S and Dawkins MS (2022)
Animal Welfare and Resistance to
Disease: Interaction of Affective States
and the Immune System.
Front. Vet. Sci. 9:929805.
doi: 10.3389/fvets.2022.929805
Animal Welfare and Resistance to
Disease: Interaction of Affective
States and the Immune System
Sandra Düpjan 1† and Marian Stamp Dawkins 2
*
1Institute of Behavioural Physiology, Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology (FBN), Dummerstorf, Germany, 2Department
of Zoology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
Good management and improved standards of animal welfare are discussed as
important ways of reducing the risk of infection in farm animals without medication.
Increasing evidence from both humans and animals suggests that environments
that promote wellbeing over stress and positive over negative emotions can reduce
susceptibility to disease and/or lead to milder symptoms. We point out, however, that
the relationship between welfare, immunity, and disease is highly complex and we
caution against claiming more than the current evidence shows. The accumulating but
sometimes equivocal evidence of close links between the brain, the gut microbiome,
immunity, and welfare are discussed in the context of the known links between mental
and physical health in humans. This evidence not only provides empirical support for
the importance of good welfare as preventative medicine in animals but also indicates a
variety of mechanisms by which good welfare can directly influence disease resistance.
Finally, we outline what still needs to be done to explore the potential preventative effects
of good welfare.
Keywords: affective state, immunity, welfare, gut microbiome, wellbeing, antibiotic resistance
INTRODUCTION
The spread of anti-microbial resistance (1,2) and the devastating effects of diseases, such as
influenza, covid, malaria, and TB, are grim reminders that even with the full resources of modern
medicine at our disposal, we are only just keeping ahead in the arms race against current and
emerging diseases. Furthermore, the current emphasis on the need to reduce the use of antibiotics
e.g., (3,4) removes an important means of safeguarding both human and animal health (5). There is
thus an urgent need to find new ways of fighting disease, preferably ones that do not use medication.
In this study, we focus on the growing evidence that an important way of reducing the risk of
infection may be through good management and improved standards of animal welfare. We draw
on evidence from both humans and animals that environments that promote wellbeing over stress
and positive over negative emotions can reduce susceptibility to disease or at least lead to milder
symptoms and quicker recovery. However, the relationship between welfare, immunity, and disease
is highly complex (6,7), and there is no simple connection between “happiness” and resistance to
infection. Therefore, we caution against claiming more than the evidence shows and outline what
still needs to be done to explore the potential preventative effects of good welfare.
Düpjan and Dawkins Affective State and Immunity
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE WELLBEING
Historically, the majority of studies on wellbeing, affective
states, and health have focused on negative wellbeing, such as
the negative effects of acute or chronic distress on morbidity
and mortality (810). However, human health has long been
acknowledged to be more than just the absence of disease (11).
Similarly, animal welfare is not just the absence of stress and
negative states (12,13). Approaches such as the Five Freedoms
(14) and Welfare Quality (15) emphasize the importance of going
beyond physical health and including mental health as well.
Physical health is ensured by keeping animals in clean, safe, and
comfortable conditions and making sure that they have adequate
access to water and nutritious food. Mental health is achieved by
keeping them in conditions in which they have predominantly
positive emotions associated with having what they like and want
(16,17).
WELLBEING AND HEALTH—EVIDENCE IN
HUMANS
In human medicine, the relatively new interdisciplinary field of
Affective Immunology studies the links between emotion and the
immune system. This covers both the way the immune system
affects the emotional state and also the way that emotions alter
the status of the immune status (7,18). Studies investigating
these links in humans use different approaches and constructs,
making it difficult to interpret results and draw conclusions for
non-human species. The term “wellbeing” includes eudaimonic
wellbeing (whether someone sees their potential fulfilled or
has a sense of purpose in life), hedonic wellbeing (having
pleasurable experiences), and optimism (the expectation of
positive results) (12,13,19). Health outcomes, on the other
hand, are conceptualized as morbidity/recovery from disease,
mortality/longevity, activation of certain parts of the immune
system or associated systems (especially the cardiovascular
system), or self-reported health. This diversity of concepts
and measures, together with variation in sample sizes and
potentially confounding variables (20), has led to controversial
results and confusion about the direction of causation. However,
systematic reviews and meta-analyses have helped to clarify
the picture.
The meta-analyses by Chida and Steptoe (9) provides
evidence for the protective effects of psychological wellbeing
on mortality, although they are more controversial for already
diseased populations (8). A more recent meta-analysis by
DuPont et al. (13) found that hedonic wellbeing is linked to
better hemodynamic recovery after stress, which might reduce
the risk of developing stress-related cardiovascular diseases.
Furthermore, good immune function is closely related to peoples’
subjective reports of being happy and satisfied with their lives
(21,22). Conversely, impaired immune function has been found
in people distressed by circumstances such as homelessness (23),
and mental illnesses such as schizophrenia and depression are
associated with an increase in the cellular immune response
(24,25) and neuronal cell surface antibodies (26,27). Chronic
stress can result in glucocorticoid receptor resistance that in turn
leads to an inflammatory immune response that is pathologically
out of control (28). On the other hand, conscientiousness
has been linked to better health and more supportive social
relationships (29), Tai Chi exercises can improve mental and
physical health in persons with cardiovascular disease (30), and
mindfulness-based training can improve emotional wellbeing
as well as physical function and health (31). However, overall
optimism does not seem to be linked to health as clearly
as hedonic wellbeing (13) or not at all when controlling for
other influencing factors in the statistical models (29). Even
though optimistic patients might be more likely to persevere
with therapy (29), optimistic judgements about health status
might prevent someone from seeking timely medical advice
(8). Indeed, Luo et al. (32) found that, during the COVID-
19 pandemic, people worrying less about the disease showed
less safety-seeking behavior, while perceived risk correlated
negatively with wellbeing.
WELLBEING AND HEALTH—EVIDENCE IN
ANIMALS
What is true for humans is now increasingly seen as applying
to animals too (33). Human depression is associated both with
chronic inflammation and compensatory responses to combat
inflammation (34,35), and there are clear parallels to stress
responses in animals (36). For example, mice that are repeatedly
subjected to stress such as being defeated in social encounters
show an inflammation response throughout the body including
enhanced neutrophil and cytokine activity (37). Social stress
in pigs caused by fighting suppressed the immune response to
a viral vaccine (38) while groups with low aggression social
support can buffer acute stress responses in both humans (39)
and other species (40,41), with positive effects on the immune
system (42,43). It follows that providing stable social groups is
a promising way of not only reducing injuries but also avoiding
inflammation resulting from the stress of aggression. Giving
animals the opportunity to feed undisturbed by conspecifics can
have beneficial effects. In a cognitive enrichment experiment pigs
had to learn their names and were then called to a feeding station,
where they could then eat by themselves, and this had positive
effects on health (44) and affective state (4547).
The physical environment can also affect immune responses
(48,49). For example, enriching the environment of turkeys with
“turkey trees” led to an increase in circulating white blood cells
(50), and providing pigs with enrichments such as straw and
branches resulted in a series of immunological changes including
a higher percentage of T cells (51). Providing pigs with straw
bedding can reduce the risk of gastric lesions (52), and young pigs
with social and environmental enrichment were less susceptible
to co-infection of PRRSV and Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae
and showed healthier lungs (53). Environmental enrichment
early in life can also have positive effects on the development of
the immune system and the establishment of gut microbiota in
pigs (51).
Frontiers in Veterinary Science | www.frontiersin.org 2June 2022 | Volume 9 | Article 929805
Düpjan and Dawkins Affective State and Immunity
WELLBEING AND HEALTH—WHAT WE
STILL NEED TO KNOW
Although animal welfare as a way of controlling a disease is
an attractive proposal with worldwide implications for both
animal and human health, it is based on many ideas that are
still largely untested (16,33). The interactions between the
brain, gut microbiome, and immune system are highly complex
(36,54,55), and there is consequently no simple relationship
between measures of immune activity and welfare. Evidence that
improved animal welfare can lead to a reduction in infection may
be true in some cases, but it is important not to claim more than
the evidence shows.
One reason for caution is the complexity of the immune
system itself. The vertebrate immune system consists of an
extraordinary range of defense mechanisms, including the
physical barrier of the skin that helps to prevent pathogens
from entering the body as well as a whole range of specialized
cells in the blood and lymphatic systems for detecting and
destroying pathogens if they do get inside the body. In addition,
an ecosystem of bacteria and other organisms living in the gut
also has a profound effect on health in general and immune
function in particular (5456).
Immune responses occur in two stages which have very
different implications for welfare. The innate or non-specific
cellular immune system provides the first set of responses
to infection or injury including the production of bacteria-
destroying granulocytes, the release of cytokines, and local
inflammation together with a whole range of sickness responses
such as fever. It is an all-purpose emergency reaction, stimulated
by a wide range of dangers and involving many different
parts of the body. It needs such a high level of nutrients to
keep it functioning that fighting disease may result in more
resources being put into immune function and less into growth
(57). Conversely, when animals become stressed, a cascade of
hormonal responses including the release of corticosteroids or
stress hormones shifts the entire metabolism away from immune
responses and toward releasing readily available energy for taking
some kind of action.
The second stage in the immune response is the more targeted
“acquired” immunity stage which consists of the development of
specific antibodies against particular diseases, in which the body
“discovers” the correct antibody against a particular disease and
then clones multiple copies. A relatively small number of specific
antigens then provide long-lasting protection against infection.
Given the complexity of these immune reactions and their
interactions with both the gut microbiome and the emotions,
there are also many different ways in which immunity can affect
and be affected by emotional state (10,58). First, changes in the
immune system, such as inflammation, may directly affect, and
be affected by, the emotional state (7,13,59). Second, immunity
and emotional state may be linked by more indirect routes, for
example, via effects on the cardiovascular system (e.g., (8,13,60)
and the gut microbiome (61). The gut microbiome is a complex
community of viruses, bacteria, archaea, and eukaryotes, the
composition of which is strongly influenced by factors such as
diet and the neurological and endocrinological responses of the
body to stress (62). In turn, the microbiome affects how the
body responds to stress and to disease challenges (61,63,64).
Even more indirectly, the immune response can be influenced
by behavioral changes such as dietary choice, rest or activity,
and avoidance of other individuals, all of which can result in
a reduced risk of disease and/or faster recovery from disease.
Looking through the literature on the links between wellbeing
and health in humans, despite known physiological pathways
(8,10), the most meaningful pathway between immunity and
health seems to be via behavior (20). The happiest and most
conscientious individuals tend to make less risky decisions and
instead engage in behaviors that improve their health, such as a
healthier diet and regular exercise (9,29).
There are thus many different ways in which improving
standards of animal welfare might influence immunity because
there are so many different ways in which the immune system
is influenced by, and exerts influence on, so many other systems
of the body. There is much that we still do not understand and
much we still have to learn. It is also important to remember that,
even if a particular practice, such as an improvement in welfare
management, affects immune responses, this is only the first step
toward the much stronger claim that improved welfare protects
against disease.
Many studies on the effects of welfare on disease, including
most of those cited in this article, have been conducted by
comparing the body’s immune response in different conditions
and then drawing conclusions about the potential effect this
might have on the ability to resist actual infection. From such
evidence, it is often concluded that keeping animals in the
higher welfare conditions would improve their ability to resist
disease. Now while this is a plausible inference from the evidence
presented, it is by no means certain that this would be the case
out there in the real world. A disease may be so severe that the
immune system, although making a valiant attempt to protect,
will be ineffective at resisting infection.
While tests of immune response under controlled conditions
are an essential preliminary, we also need on-farm studies to
demonstrate that farm animals can actually realize the full
potential of their immune function under real-world conditions.
The ultimate test of the protective effect of good animal
welfare must therefore be evidence that, under commercial farm
conditions, animals kept in high welfare conditions are less likely
to fall victim to disease or more likely to recover quickly, along
with guidance about the limitations of what improved welfare can
achieve. To exaggerate the effects of good management on disease
resistance could be as counter-productive as ignoring the effects
of good welfare altogether. There is an urgent need for research
in this area and it needs to be based on evidence collected in the
real world.
THE PATH TO BETTER WELFARE
Even knowing more about the relationship between disease
resistance and welfare will not, however, resolve fundamental
issues about how to implement them in practice. Indeed, there
may be conflicts about how best to reduce the risks of different
Frontiers in Veterinary Science | www.frontiersin.org 3June 2022 | Volume 9 | Article 929805
Düpjan and Dawkins Affective State and Immunity
diseases. In dairy cattle, access to pasture can reduce the risk of
mastitis, claw health, and other health issues, but this can come
with a higher risk for parasitism and malnutrition (65).
For some people “improving welfare” means moving toward
free-range systems and away from intensive indoor methods
of production altogether, despite these extra risks. There is a
widespread assumption that animals are more likely to be healthy
and to have positive emotions if they can show more “natural
behaviour” (6668) and the health risk of reduced biosecurity
is judged as less important than the positive welfare benefits of
a more “natural” life (69). In complete contrast, other people
see the route to better welfare being through the increased use
of technology that allows not only improved biosecurity but
the provision of optimal environmental conditions that allow
the immune system to function more effectively. For example,
heat stress is a major form of poor welfare, leading to a variety
of pathologies, including making animals more susceptible to
infection (51,70). Amongst other effects, heat stress damages
the intestinal mucosa of poultry, making it more likely that
endotoxins and even bacteria will enter the bloodstream (71). The
controlled indoor conditions achievable by smart farming can do
a great deal to reduce heat and other stressors (72). On the other
hand, there may be adverse consequences for resistance to other
diseases caused by high stocking densities or other features of
intensive systems (73).
These two opposite views of how to improve welfare—more
extensive outside “natural” living versus more intensive indoor
technology-led living—clearly have very different implications
for disease risk, both for the chances of animals encountering
infective organisms in the first place and also for how their bodies
might later react to being infected. There are no simple answers
and future developments will need to find a balance between the
costs and benefits of different systems. Animal welfare is only one
of many weapons we have in the fight against infection, one that
has perhaps not yet been fully appreciated but one where our
knowledge is still very incomplete.
CONCLUSIONS
The hypothesis that good animal welfare optimizes the
conditions in which the body’s own natural defenses operate
most effectively and can therefore be an effective weapon against
infectious disease is a potential of major significance to both
animal and human health. However, it currently lacks good
supporting evidence, and it is important not to oversell the idea
or exaggerate the ability of good animal welfare to substitute
for medication. To test the hypothesis, it will be necessary to
demonstrate that high welfare conditions (carefully defined)
actually do protect against disease, not just in theory, in the
lab, or in experimental conditions but in real-world commercial
conditions. There may have to be many caveats, such as that
good welfare can offer protection with some diseases but not
others or that some aspects of “good welfare”, such as avoiding
diseases associated with overheating, may be in conflict with
what is meant by “good welfare” in some other respect such as
allowing animals to range outdoors. With two things as complex
as disease prevention and animal welfare, we should not expect
simple solutions.
However, the accumulating evidence of close links
between the brain, the gut microbiome, immunity, and
welfare as well as the known links between mental
and physical health in humans not only provides
empirical support for the importance of good welfare
as preventative medicine but also indicates a variety of
mechanisms by which good welfare can directly influence
disease resistance.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The original contributions presented in the study are included
in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be
directed to the corresponding author.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual
contribution to the work and approved it for publication.
FUNDING
The publication of this article was funded by the Open Access
Fund of the FBN.
REFERENCES
1. Hudson JA, Frewer LJ, Jones G, Brereton PA, Whittingham MJ, Stewart G.
The agri-food chain and antimicrobial resistance: A review. Trends Food Sci
Technol. (2017) 69:131–47. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2017.09.007
2. Aidara-Kane A, Angulo FJ, Conly JM, Minato Y, Silbergeld EK, McEwen
SA, et al. for the WHO Guideline Development Group. World health
Organisation (WHO) guidelines on use of medically important microbials
in food-processing animals. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. (2018)
7:7. doi: 10.1186/s13756-017-0294-9
3. ECDC (European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control), EFSA
(European Food Safety Authority), and EMA (European Medicines Agency).
2017 ECDC/EFSA/EMA second joint report on the integrated analysis of
the consumption of antimicrobial agents and occurrence of antimicrobial
resistance in bacteria from humans and food-producing animals Joint
Interagency Antimicrobial Consumption and Resistance Analysis (JIACRA)
Report. EFSA J. (2017) 15:135. doi: 10.2903/j.efsa.2017.4872
4. Ying GG, He LY, Ying AJ, Zhang QQ, Liu YS, Zhao JI. China
must reduce its antibiotic use. Environ Sci Technol. (2017) 51:1072–
3. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b06424
5. Rojo-Gimeno C, Postma M, Dewulf J, Hogeveen H, Lauwers L,
Wauters E. Farm-economic analysis of reducing antimicrobial use
while adopting improved management strategies on farrow-to-finish pig
farms. Prev Vet Med. (2016) 129:74–87. doi: 10.1016/j.prevetmed.2016.
05.001
6. Berghman LR. Immune responses to improving welfare. Poult Sci. (2016)
95:2216–8. doi: 10.3382/ps/pew159
7. D’Acquisto F. Affective immunology: Where emotions and the
immune response converge. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. (2017)
19:9–19. doi: 10.31887/DCNS.2017.19.1/fdacquisto
Frontiers in Veterinary Science | www.frontiersin.org 4June 2022 | Volume 9 | Article 929805
Düpjan and Dawkins Affective State and Immunity
8. Pressman SD, Cohen S. Does positive affect influence health? Psychol Bull.
(2005) 131:925–71. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.131.6.925
9. Chida Y, Steptoe A. Positive psychological wellbeing and mortality: A
quantitative review of prospective observational studies. Psychosom Med.
(2008) 70:741–56. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0b013e31818105ba
10. Huffman JC, Legler SR, Boehm JK. Positive psychological wellbeing and
health in patients with heart disease: A brief review. Future Cardiol. (2017)
13:443–50. doi: 10.2217/fca-2017-0016
11. World Health Organization. Preamble to the Constitution of the World Health
Organization. In: Official records of the World Health Organization. Geneva:
World Health Organization. (1948) p. 100.
12. Ryff CD, Singer BH, Love GD. Positive health: Connecting
wellbeing with biology. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B. (2004)
359:1383–94. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2004.1521
13. DuPont CM, Weis TM, Manuck SB, Marsland AL, Matthews KA, Gianaros
PJ. Does wellbeing associate with stress physiology? A systematic review and
meta-analysis. Health Psychol. (2020) 39:879–90. doi: 10.1037/hea0000979
14. FAWC (Farm Animal Welfare Council). Farm Animal Welfare in Great
Britain: Past, Present and Future. London: FAWC (2009). Available online
at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_data/file/319292/Farm_Animal_Welfare_in_Great_
Britain_-_Past__Present_and_Future.pdf
15. Welfare Quality R
.Welfare Quality R
Assessment Protocol for Poultry (Broiler,
Laying Hens). Lelystad, The Netherlands: Welfare Quality Consortium (2009).
16. Boissy A, Manteuffel G, Jensen MB, Moe RO, Spruijt B, Keeling LJ, et al.
Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare. Physiol
Behav. (2007) 92:375–97. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.02.003
17. Green TC, Mellor DJ. Extending ideas about animal welfare assessment
to include ‘quality of life’ and related concepts. N. Zealand Vet J. (2011)
59:263–71. doi: 10.1080/00480169.2011.610283
18. Vasile C. Mental health and immunity (Review). Exp Ther Med. (2020)
20:211. doi: 10.3892/etm.2020.9341
19. Cohen R, Bavishi C, Rozanski A. Purpose in life and its relationship to all-
cause mortality and cardiovascular events: a meta-analysis. Psychosom Med.
(2016) 78:122–33. doi: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000000274
20. Steptoe A. Happiness and health. Annu Rev Public Health. (2019) 40:339–
59. doi: 10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044150
21. Nakata A, Takahashi M, Irie M, Swanson NG. Job satisfaction is
associated with elevated natural killer cell immunity among healthy,
white-collar employees. Brain, Behavior and Immunity. (2010) 24:1268–
75. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2010.05.004
22. Takao Y, Okuno Y, Mori Y, Asasa H, Yamanishi K, Iso H. Associations of
perceived mental stress, sense of purpose in life, and negative life events with
the risk of incident herpes zoster and postherpetic neuralgia: The SHEZ study.
Am J Epidemiol. (2018) 187:251–9. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwx249
23. Arranz L, de Vicente A, Muñoz M, De la Fuente M. Impaired
immune function in a homeless population with stress-related disorders.
Neuroimmunomodulation. (2009) 16:251–60. doi: 10.1159/000212386
24. Maes M. Depression as an inflammatory disease, but cell-mediated immune
activation is the key component of depression. Prog Neuropsychopharmacol
Biol Psychiatry. (2011) 35:664–75. doi: 10.1016/j.pnpbp.2010.06.014
25. Horsdal HT, Köhler-Forsberg O, Benros ME, Gasse C. C-reactive protein and
white blood cell levels in schizophrenia, bipolar disorders and depression-
associations with mortality and psychiatric outcomes: a population-based
study. Eur Psychiatry. (2017) 44:164–72. doi: 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.04.012
26. Steiner J, Bogerts B, Sarnyai Z, Walter M, Gos T, Bernstein HG, et al. Bridging
the gap between the immune and glutamate hypotheses of schizophrenia
and major depression: Potential role of glial NMDA receptor modulators
and impaired blood-brain barrier integrity. World J Biol Psychiatry. (2012)
13:482–92. doi: 10.3109/15622975.2011.583941
27. Lennox BR, Palmer-Cooper EC, Pollak T, Hainsworth J, Marks J, Jacobson
L, et al. PPiP study team. Prevalence and clinical characteristics of
serum neuronal cell surface antibodies in first-episode psychosis: a case-
control study. Lancet Psychiatry. (2017) 4:42–8. doi: 10.1016/S2215-0366(16)
30375-3
28. Cohen S, Janicki-Deverts D, Doyle WJ, Miller GE, Frank E, Rabin BS, et al.
Chronic stress, glucocorticoid receptor resistance, inflammation, and disease
risk. PNAS. (2012) 109:5995–9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1118355109
29. Friedman HS, Kern ML. Personality, wellbeing, and health. Annu Rev Psychol.
(2014) 65:719–42. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115123
30. Taylor-Piliae RE, Finley BA. Tai Chi exercise for psychological
wellbeing among adults with cardiovascular disease: A systematic
review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. (2020)
19:580–91. doi: 10.1177/1474515120926068
31. Zhang J, Xu R, Wang B, Wang J. Effects of mindfulness-based therapy
for patients with breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Complement Ther Med. (2016) 26:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ctim.2016.02.012
32. Luo YF, Shen HY, Yang SC, Chen LC. The relationships among anxiety,
subjective wellbeing, media consumption, and safety-seeking behaviors
during the COVID-19 epidemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2021)
18:13189. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182413189
33. Dawkins MS. Animal welfare as preventative medicine. Animal Welfare.
(2019) 28:137–41. doi: 10.7120/09627286.28.2.137
34. Berk M, Williams LJ, Jacka FN, O’Neil A, Pasco JA, Moylan S, et al. So
depression is an inflammatory disease, but where does the inflammation come
from? BMC Med. (2013) 11:200. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-11-200
35. Talarowska ME, Kowalczyk M, Maes M, Carvalho A, Su KP, Szemraj
J, et al. Immune to happiness-inflammatory process indicators and
depressive personality traits. Archives of Medical Science. (2020) 16:848–
57. doi: 10.5114/aoms.2019.83146
36. Dantzer R, O’Connor JC, Freund GG, Johnson RW, Kelley KW. From
inflammation to sickness and depression: when the immune system subjugates
the brain. Nat Rev Neurosci. (2008) 9:46–57. https://dx.doi.org/10.1038
%2Fnrn2297 doi: 10.1038/nrn2297
37. Lafuse WP, Gearinger R, Fisher S, Nealer C, Mackos AR, Bailey MT.
Exposure to a social stressor induces translocation of commensal Lactobacilli
to the spleen and priming of the innate immune system. J Immunol.
(2017)198:2383–93. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1601269
38. de Groot J, Ruis MAW, Scholten JW, Koolhaas JM, Boersma WJA. Long-term
effects of social stress on antiviral immunity in pigs. Physiol Behav. (2001)
73:145–58. doi: 10.1016/S0031-9384(01)00472-3
39. Cohen S, Wills TA. Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis.
Psychological Bull. (1985) 98:310–57. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310
40. Kikusui T, Winslow JT, Mori Y. Social buffering: Relief from stress and
anxiety. Philos Trans R Soc Lond, B. (2006) 361:2215–28. doi: 10.1098/rstb.
2006.1941
41. Kanitz E, Hameister T, Tuchscherer M, Tuchscherer A, Puppe
B. Social support attenuates the adverse consequences of social
deprivation stress in domestic piglets. Horm Behav. (2014)
65:203–10. doi: 10.1016/j.yhbeh.2014.01.007
42. Tuchscherer M, Kanitz E, Puppe B, Hameister T, Tuchscherer A.
Social support modulates splenocyte glucocorticoid sensitivity in piglets
exposed to social deprivation stress. Physiol Behav. (2014) 131:25–
32. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2014.04.010
43. Tuchscherer M, Kanitz E, Tuchscherer A, Puppe B. Effects of social support on
glucocorticoid sensitivity of lymphocytes in socially deprived piglets. Stress.
(2016) 19:325–32. doi: 10.1080/10253890.2016.1179276
44. Ernst K, Tuchscherer M, Kanitz E, Puppe B, Manteuffel G. Effects of attention
and rewarded activity on immune parameters and wound healing in pigs.
Physiol Behav. (2006) 89:448–56. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2006.07.001
45. Puppe B, Ernst K, Schön PC, Manteuffel G. Cognitive enrichment affects
behavioural reactivity in domestic pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci. (2007) 105:75–
86. doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.016
46. Kalbe C, Puppe B. Long-term cognitive enrichment affects opioid receptor
expression in the amygdala of domestic pigs. Genes Brain and Behavior. (2010)
9:75–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-183X.2009.00536.x
47. Zebunke M, Langbein J, Manteuffel G, Puppe B. Autonomic reactions
indicating positive affect during acoustic reward learning in domestic pigs.
Anim Behav. (2011) 81:481–9. doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2010.11.023
48. Brod S, Gobbetti T, Gittens B, Ono M, Perretti M, D’Acquisto F. The impact
of environmental enrichment on the murine inflammatory immune response.
JCI Insight. 2 (2017) e90723. doi: 10.1172/jci.insight.90723
49. Luo L, Jansen CA, Bolhuis JE, Arts JAJ, Kemp B, Parmentier HK.
Early and later life environmental enrichment affect specific antibody
responses and blood leukocyte subpopulations in pigs. Physiol Behav. (2020)
217:112799. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2020.112799
Frontiers in Veterinary Science | www.frontiersin.org 5June 2022 | Volume 9 | Article 929805
Düpjan and Dawkins Affective State and Immunity
50. Lindenwald R, Schuberth HJ, Spindler B, Rautenschlein S.
Influence of environmental enrichment on circulating white blood
cell counts and behaviour of females turkeys. Poult Sci. (2021)
100:101360. doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2021.101360
51. Wen C, van Dixhoorn I, Schokker D, Woelders H, Stockhofe-Zurwieden
N, Rebel JMJ, et al. Environmentally enriched housing conditions affect pig
welfare, immune system and gut microbiota in early life. Animal Microbiome.
(2021) 3:52. doi: 10.1186/s42523-021-00115-2
52. Bolhuis JE, van den Brand H, Staals S, Gerrits WJJ. Effects of pregelatinized
vs native potato starch on intestinal weight and stomach lesions of pigs
housed in barren pens or on straw bedding. Livestock Science. (2007) 109:108–
10. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2007.01.100
53. van Dixhoorn IDE, Reimert I, Middelkoop J, Bolhuis JE, Wisselink HJ, Groot
Koerkamp PWG, et al. Enriched housing reduces disease susceptibility to
co-infection with porcine reproductive and respiratory virus (PRRSV) and
Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae (A. Pleuropneumoniae) in young pigs. PLoS
ONE. (2016) 11:e0161832. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161832
54. Bailey MT, Cryan, JF. The microbiome as a key regulator of brain, behaviour
and immunity: Commentary on the 2017 named series. Brain, Behavior, and
Immunity. (2017) 66:18–22. doi: 10.1016/j.bbi.2017.08.017
55. Leonard BE. Inflammation and depression: causal or coincidental
link to the pathophysiology? Acta Neuropsychiatr. (2018)
30:1–16. doi: 10.1017/neu.2016.69
56. Yeoman CJ, White BA. Gastrointestinal tract microbiota and
probiotics in production animals. Annu Rev Anim Biosci. (2014)
2:469–86. doi: 10.1146/annurev-animal-022513-114149
57. Brock PM, Hall AJ, Goodman SJ, Cruz M, Acevedo-Whitehouse
K. Immune activity. Body condition and human-associated
environmental impacts in a wild marine mammal. PLoS ONE. (2013)
8:e67132. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0067132
58. Sin NL. The protective role of positive wellbeing in cardiovascular disease:
Review of current evidence, mechanisms, and clinical implications. Curr
Cardiol Rep. (2016) 18:106. doi: 10.1007/s11886-016-0792-z
59. Ironson G, Banerjee N, Fitch C, Krause N. Positive emotional wellbeing,
health behaviors, and inflammation measured by C-Reactive protein. Soc Sci
Med. (2018) 197:235–43. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.06.020
60. Chida Y, Hamer M. Chronic psychosocial factors and acute physiological
responses to laboratory-induced stress in healthy populations: a quantitative
review of 30 years of investigations. Psychol Bull. (2008) 134:829–
85. doi: 10.1037/a0013342
61. Kraimi N, Dawkins M, Gebhardt-Henrich, Velge P, Rychlik I, Volf
J, et al. Influence of the microbiota-gut-brain axis on behaviour
and welfare in farm animals: a review. Physiol Behav. (2019)
210:112658. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2019.112658
62. Villageliu DN, Lyte M. Microbial endocrinology: Why the intersection of
microbiology and neurobiology matters to poultry health. Poult Sci. (2017)
96:2501–8. doi: 10.3382/ps/pex148
63. Dinan TG, Cryan JF. Regulation of the stress response by the gut microbiota:
Implications for psychoneuroendocrinology. Psychoneuroendocrinology.
(2012) 37:1369–78. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2012.03.007
64. Brod S, Rattazzi L, Piras G, D’Acquisto F. ’As above, so below’ examining
the interplay between emotion and the immune system. Immunology. (2014)
143:311–8. doi: 10.1111/imm.12341
65. Mee JF, Boyle LA. Assessing whether dairy cow welfare is “better” in pasture-
based than in confinement-based management systems. N Z Vet J. (2020)
68:168–77. doi: 10.1080/00480169.2020.1721034
66. Rabin LA. Maintaining behavioural biodiversity in captivity for
conservation: natural behaviour management. Animal Welfare. (2003) 12:
85–94.
67. Yeates JW. How good? Ethical criteria for a ‘Good Life’ for farm animals. J
Agric Environ Ethics. (2017) 30:23–35. doi: 10.1007/s10806-017-9650-2
68. Yeates JW. Naturalness and animal welfare. Animals. (2018)
8:53. doi: 10.3390/ani8040053
69. Nussbaum MC. Beyond ‘compassion and humanity’: Justice for non-human
animals. In: Sunstein CS, Nussbaum MC, editors. Animal Rights: Current
Debates and New Directions. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (2004). p.
299–320. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195305104.003.0015
70. Bilal RM, Hassan FU, Farag MR, Nasir TA, Ragni M, Mahgoub HAM,
Alagawany M. Thermal stress and high stocking densities in poultry
farms: potential effects and mitigation strategies. J Therm Biol. (2021)
99:102944. doi: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2021.102944
71. Alhenaky A, Abdelqader A, Abuajamieh M, Al-Fataftah AR. The effect of heat
stress on intestinal integrity and Salmonella invasion in broiler birds. J Therm
Biol. (2017) 70:9–14. doi: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2017.10.015
72. Dawkins MS. Does smart farming improve or damage animal
welfare? Technology and what animals want. Front Anim Sci. (2021)
2:736536. doi: 10.3389/fanim.2021.736536
73. Wathes CM, Kristensen HH, Aerts JM, Berckmans D. Is precision livestock
farming an engineer’s daydream or nightmare, an animal’s friend or foe,
and a farmer’s panacea or pitfall? Comput Electron Agric. (2008) 64:2–
10. doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2008.05.005
Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s Note: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of
the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in
this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
endorsed by the publisher.
Copyright © 2022 Düpjan and Dawkins. This is an open-access article distributed
under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The
use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the
original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original
publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these
terms.
Frontiers in Veterinary Science | www.frontiersin.org 6June 2022 | Volume 9 | Article 929805
... Positive emotions have been associated with improved health in humans (1,2), and emerging evidence suggests similar effects in farm animals (3,4). Emotions and immunity work in synergy, and there are indications that a positive affective state has a beneficial effect on disease resilience (4,5). ...
... Positive emotions have been associated with improved health in humans (1,2), and emerging evidence suggests similar effects in farm animals (3,4). Emotions and immunity work in synergy, and there are indications that a positive affective state has a beneficial effect on disease resilience (4,5). Resilience, defined as the ability of the animal to minimize the impact of environmental, social and disease challenges and quickly return to pre-challenge status (6), is imperative to sustain efficient pig production. ...
... The type and number of comparisons are in italics and parentheses, respectively. (A) Treatment X DPI-within treatment across consecutive DPI periods; baseline DPI period 1 vs. 4 (58). Although horizontal transmission of the virus varied among pigs, it likely had little to no impact on pathogen spread, as the pigs were already infected when shedding and horizontal transmission occurred. ...
Article
Full-text available
Positive emotions can reduce disease susceptibility during infectious challenges in humans, and emerging evidence suggests similar effects in farm animals. Because play behaviour may support a positive emotional state in pigs, this study investigates whether rearing pigs with regular intermittent play opportunities enhances disease resilience when challenged with porcine reproductive and respiratory syndrome virus (PRRSV). Litters were assigned to either play (PLY; n = 5 L) or control (CON; n = 4 L) treatments at birth. In PLY, play was promoted with extra space and enrichment items for three hours daily from five days of age (doa). At weaning (25 ± 2 doa; mean ± SD), 28 pigs (14/treatment) were selected for a disease challenge, based on weight, sex, and sow. The pigs were transported to a disease containment facility and at 43 ± 2 doa (day 0 post-inoculation, DPI) inoculated with PRRSV. Skin lesions, blood, rectal temperature, clinical signs, body weight, and behaviour were collected pre- and post-inoculation. Play opportunities for PLY continued every other day until euthanasia of all pigs at 65 ± 2 doa (22 DPI). PLY pigs exhibited fewer skin lesions following transport and throughout the infection compared to CON. Although the viral load did not differ between treatments, PLY pigs had a lower probability of experiencing moderate and severe respiratory distress, with a shorter duration. PLY also performed better throughout the infection, showing higher ADG and greater feed efficiency. The immune response differed as well. PLY pigs had fewer monocytes on 8 DPI than CON, with levels returning to baseline by 21 DPI, whereas CON levels exceeded baseline. Regardless of day of infection, lymphocyte counts tended to be lower in PLY than in CON, and white blood cells and neutrophils were also lower, but only in slow-growing pigs. PLY pigs continued to play during the infection, demonstrating less sickness behaviour and emphasizing the rewarding properties of play. Results suggest that PLY pigs were less affected by PRRSV and developed increased resilience to PRRSV compared to CON. This study demonstrates that rearing pigs in an environment supporting positive experiences through provision of play opportunities can enhance resilience against common modern production challenges, underscoring the value of positive welfare in intensive pig farming.
... This can aid in predicting effective interventions and guide the management practices for improving animal health and welfare [14,104]. Furthermore, systems biology can provide a comprehensive view of the interplay between environmental factors, animal physiology and behavior and of how these factors can impact animal welfare [105]. This can guide the development of evidencebased management strategies for promoting animal welfare in livestock production systems [2]. ...
... Ultimately, the aim of this review article was to emphasize how veterinary systems biology revolutionizes our understanding of livestock biology for bridging the gap between phenotype and genotype and to guide the development of effective management strategies to improve the health and well-being of livestock [2]. As such, these approaches have the potential to contribute to more sustainable and efficient livestock production systems, while reducing the use of antibiotics, and maintaining human and environmental health as well [14,15,19,25,105,130]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Veterinary systems biology is an innovative approach that integrates biological data at the molecular and cellular levels, allowing for a more extensive understanding of the interactions and functions of complex biological systems in livestock and veterinary science. It has tremendous potential to integrate multi-omics data with the support of vetinformatics resources for bridging the phenotype–genotype gap via computational modeling. To understand the dynamic behaviors of complex systems, computational models are frequently used. It facilitates a comprehensive understanding of how a host system defends itself against a pathogen attack or operates when the pathogen compromises the host’s immune system. In this context, various approaches, such as systems immunology, network pharmacology, vaccinology and immunoinformatics, can be employed to effectively investigate vaccines and drugs. By utilizing this approach, we can ensure the health of livestock. This is beneficial not only for animal welfare but also for human health and environmental well-being. Therefore, the current review offers a detailed summary of systems biology advancements utilized in veterinary sciences, demonstrating the potential of the holistic approach in disease epidemiology, animal welfare and productivity.
... Gastrointestinal infections with pathogenic bacterial species represent a major risk of disrupted gut barrier integrity and function. They are a particular concern in large-scale farm settings, where production animals might be exposed to social and/or environmental stressful conditions, which may make them more susceptible to infections [4]. For instance, enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) is a frequent cause of neonatal diarrhea in calves [5], whereas enteric, septicemic, and reproductive diseases caused by Salmonella species are highly problematic in dairy cattle [6]. ...
... Ingestion of enteric pathogenic bacterial species or mycotoxins of the trichothecene family are well-known factors that disrupt gut barrier integrity and function [6,7,20,37]. They are a particular concern for the health of livestock animals, which often face physical and/or environmental stressful conditions, e.g., weaning, transportation, feed and water deprivation, or heat stress, which may negatively impact their immune responses, rendering them more susceptible to infections [4,38,39]. Therefore, dietary supplements capable of supporting gut barrier integrity during stressful conditions are warranted in the field of animal health and nutrition. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study investigated the impact of L. animalis 506 on gut barrier integrity and regulation of inflammation in vitro using intestinal epithelial cell lines. Caco-2 or HT29 cell monolayers were challenged with enterotoxigenic E. coli (ETEC) or a ruminant isolate of Salmonella Heidelberg in the presence or absence of one of six probiotic Lactobacillus spp. strains. Among these, L. animalis 506 excelled at exerting protective effects by significantly mitigating the decreased transepithelial electrical resistance (TEER) as assessed using area under the curve (AUC) (p < 0.0001) and increased apical-to-basolateral fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) dextran translocation (p < 0.0001) across Caco-2 cell monolayers caused by S. Heidelberg or ETEC, respectively. Similarly, L. animalis 506 and other probiotic strains significantly attenuated the S. Heidelberg- and ETEC-induced increase in IL-8 from HT29 cells (p < 0.0001). Moreover, L. animalis 506 significantly counteracted the TEER decrease (p < 0.0001) and FITC dextran translocation (p < 0.0001) upon challenge with Clostridium perfringens. Finally, L. animalis 506 significantly attenuated DON-induced TEER decrease (p < 0.01) and FITC dextran translocation (p < 0.05) and mitigated occludin and zona occludens (ZO)-1 redistribution in Caco-2 cells caused by the mycotoxin. Collectively, these results demonstrate the ability of L. animalis 506 to confer protective effects on the intestinal epithelium in vitro upon challenge with enteric pathogens and DON known to be of particular concern in farm animals.
... Additionally, the H/L ratio does not respond to all conditions potentially affecting welfare (e.g., positively-valenced conditions), suggesting it is an incomplete indicator (Müller et al. 2011). More research is still required to determine whether H/L ratios could also reflect positive welfare (Düpjan and Dawkins 2022). ...
... For poultry geneticists, breeding to improve disease resistance is the biggest challenge to overcome. Strengthening an animal's resistance to infectious disease has several benefits, such as an improvement in animal welfare, an increase in productivity and efficiency as well as a smaller ecological footprint and a reduced need for additional disease control measures and increased public awareness (Detilleux, 2001;Düpjan & Dawkins, 2022;Knap & Doeschl-Wilson, 2020). However, breeding for disease resistance presents many challenges (Bai & Plastow, 2022). ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Salmonella enteritidis (SE), a previously widespread infectious disease, is still cited as a major factor in economic losses in commercial chicken production. The host's genetic immune system determines the pathogenicity of a particular bacterium. To shed light on this topic, it was necessary to understand the key candidate genes essential for regulating susceptibility and resistance to the target disease. The field of poultry farming in particular has benefited greatly from the connection between quantitative and molecular genetics. Objectives This study aims to identify the most important immune‐related genes and their signalling pathways (gene ontology, co‐expression and interactions) and to analyse their accumulation in host‐resistant SE diseases by combining gene expression assays with model‐based in silico evidence. Methods A two‐step experimental design is followed. To start, we used free computational tools and online bioinformatics resources, including predicting gene function using a multiple association network integration algorithm (geneMania), the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes, the Annotation, Visualization and Integrated Discovery (DAVID) database and the stimulator of interferon genes. Natural resistance‐associated macrophage protein 1 (NRAMP1), Toll‐like receptor 4 (TLR4), interferon‐γ (IFNγ), immunoglobulin Y (IgY) and interleukin 8 (IL8) were among the five genes whose expression levels in liver, spleen, and cecum were evaluated at 1107 SE after 48 h of inoculation. This molecular study was developed in the second phase of research to validate the in silico observations. Next, we use five promising biomarkers for relative real‐time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) quantification: TLR4, IL8, NRAMP1, IFNγ and IgY genes in two case and control assays. The 2−∆∆Ct Livak and Schmittgen method was used to compare the expression of genes in treated and untreated samples. This method normalizes the expression of the target gene to that of actin, an internal control and estimates the change in expression relative to the untreated control. Internal control was provided by the Beta actin gene. Next, statistically, the postdoc test was used for the evaluation of treatments using SAS version 9.4, and p values of 0.05 and 0.01 were chosen for significant level. Results Interestingly, the results of our study suggest the involvement of various factors in the host immune response to Salmonella. These include inducible nitric oxide synthase, NRAMP1, immunoglobulin light chain (IgL), transforming growth factor B family (TGFb2, TGFb3 and TGFb4), interleukin 2 (IL2), apoptosis inhibitor protein 1 (IAP1), TLR4, myeloid differentiation protein 2 (MD2), IFNγ, caspase 1 (CASP1), lipopolysaccharide‐induced tumour necrosis factor (LITAF), cluster of differentiation 28 (CD28) and prosaposin (PSAP). The summary of gene ontology and related genes found for SE resistance was surprisingly comprehensive and covered the following topics: positive regulation of endopeptidase activity, interleukin‐8 production, chemokine production, interferon‐gamma production, interleukin‐6 production, positive regulation of mononuclear cell proliferation and response to interferon‐gamma. The role of these promising biomarkers in our networks against SE susceptibility is essentially confirmed by these results. After 48 h, the spleen showed significant expression of the tissue‐specific gene expression patterns for NRAMP1 and IL8 in the cecum, spleen and liver. Based on this information, this report searches for resistance and susceptibility lineages in most genomic regions for SE. Conclusions In conclusion, the development of an appropriate selection program to improve resistance to salmonellosis can be facilitated by a comprehensive understanding of the immune responses of the chicken immune system after SE exposure.
... On-farm studies are needed to demonstrate that conditions of high welfare degree effectively protect against diseases, whether in experimental conditions or commercial settings. The close relationships among the brain, gut microbiome, immunity, and welfare, alongside established links between mental and physical health, substantiate the significance of high welfare as preventive strategy for disease resistance (24)(25)(26). ...
Article
Full-text available
This study assessed qualitative and quantitative leukocyte evaluation as potential broiler chicken welfare indicators, contributing to the limited literature on white blood cell (WBC) morphology as a diagnostic tool for welfare. Broiler chicken welfare within four poultry houses (PH) 1 to 4, each on a different farm, was assessed using on-field indicators of affective states and health, and WBC morphology was examined. Affective states were evaluated using the Qualitative Behavior Assessment (QBA), with 25 behavioral expressions scored on a visual analogue scale (VAS) and grouped into two categories. Health indicators included assessments of lameness, footpad dermatitis, dermatitis on the breast and abdominal areas, hock burn, and feather cleaning. Blood samples were collected, differential leukocyte counts were performed, and a cell score was created for the recognition, classification, and interpretation of morphologic diversity of heterophils and lymphocytes. The heterophil to lymphocyte ratio (H/L) was also determined. Descriptive statistics and generalized linear models for binomial responses were used to analyze the results. PH4 differed from the other farms, showing a higher frequency of birds within QBA group 1 (‘Attentive’to ‘Desperate’), while birds in PH1, PH2, and PH3 were more frequent in QBA group 2 (‘Relaxed’ to ‘Positively occupied’). Elevated proportions of heterophils in birds from PH4 (0.61, CI95%: 0.58; 0.64) and PH3 (0.60, CI95%: 0.57; 0.63) suggested higher stress levels and inflammatory responses. Birds in PH2 and PH4 exhibited higher frequencies of health issues such as dermatitis and lameness, and higher proportions of abnormalities in WBC number and morphology. PH3 and PH4 exhibited higher H/L ratios of 3.03 and 2.58, respectively, consistent with the on-field health and behavioral indicators. Blood samples from birds in PH2 and PH4 showed a proportion of 90% toxic change in heterophils, while in PH1 and PH3 it was 70%, indicating high levels of abnormal WBC morphology across all PHs. The findings emphasize the multifactorial nature of welfare impairments, including environmental conditions, health, and affective states. This highlights the need for indicators that reflect multiple welfare impacts, such as WBC counts and morphological alterations, which can serve as powerful tools in the complex task of assessing animal welfare.
... Concluding this Research Topic, Düpjan and Dawkins (2022) provide evidence supporting the idea that good welfare can influence disease resistance. Following this, Smith introduces Norecopa, a website summarizing the steps in preparing animal studies, primarily based on the PREPARE guidelines, aimed at enhancing planning and reducing animal use in research. ...
... These diseases can be initiated by diverse factors, including viral, bacterial, and parasitic infections, as well as stressors related to the environment and management, such as insufficient nutrition or overcrowding [1]. These illnesses can weaken the animal's immune system, making it more vulnerable to secondary infections and reducing its ability to fight against pathogens [24]. ...
Chapter
Full-text available
Medicinal plants have represented accessible and highly bioavailable remedies in traditional therapeutic and preventive practices of numerous populations worldwide. Veterinary treatments based on medicinal plants are also widespread, mainly targeting the control or prevention of parasitic diseases. Scientific support of the immune-stimulating efficacy of plants or their extracts in animals is less documented. The immunological activity of alcoholic plant extracts was investigated in numerous animal classes, starting from Pisces, through Reptilia and Aves and reaching Mammalia, envisaging their effects on innate and adaptive cell-mediated immunity, which the authors mean to share in this chapter, also providing a comparison of variable reactivity within and between the classes.
... The immune system plays a pivotal role in upholding animal well-being and countering instances of infectious diseases (Düpjan and Dawkins 2022). The capacity of β-carotene to bolster immune activity through its influence on various immune cells has been established (Roe and Fuller 1993;Hughes 1999;Chew and Park 2004;Imamura et al. 2006). ...
Article
Full-text available
The potential benefits of β-carotene, a leading provitamin A carotenoid, have been meticulously explored in various livestock species, propelling a realm of extensive research in this domain. Despite of not being considered as an essential micronutrient for these animals, its supplementation has gained substantial attention within the agricultural industry due to its capacity to enhance animal well-being, productivity, and the quality of the derived products. In pursuit of a comprehensive understanding, this review endeavours to juxtapose the effects of β-carotene supplementation in poultry, swine, and cattle. In doing so, we delve into a diverse range of physiological responses, intricate metabolic pathways, and the profound influence of β-carotene on pivotal aspects such as immune response, antioxidant status, and reproduction across these three important livestock species. Recognizing diverse reactions to β-carotene supplementation across species is pivotal for refining animal production and welfare standards. This review sheds light on the complex interplay between β-carotene and livestock physiology, contributing to a holistic understanding of how this provitamin A carotenoid can optimize animal health, productivity, and the sustainability of the livestock industry. Furthermore, it underscores the significance of tailoring nutritional strategies to the specific needs of various animal species, ultimately benefiting both producers and consumers.
Article
Full-text available
The COVID-19 epidemic has been confirmed as the largest scale outbreak of atypical pneumonia since the outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2003 and it has become a public health emergency of international concern. It exacerbated public confusion and anxiety, and the impact of COVID-19 on people needs to be better understood. Indeed, prior studies that conducted meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort research compared mental health before versus during the COVID-19 pandemic and proved that public health polices (e.g., city lockdowns, quarantines, avoiding gatherings, etc.) and COVID-19-related information that circulates on new media platforms directly affected citizen’s mental health and well-being. Hence, this research aims to explore Taiwanese people’s health status, anxiety, media sources for obtaining COVID-19 information, subjective well-being, and safety-seeking behavior during the COVID-19 epidemic and how they are associated. Online surveys were conducted through new media platforms, and 342 responses were included in the analysis. The research results indicate that the participants experienced different aspects of COVID-19 anxiety, including COVID-19 worry and perceived COVID-19 risk. Among the given media sources, the more participants searched for COVID-19 information on new media, the greater they worried about COVID-19. Furthermore, COVID-19 worry was positively related to safety-seeking behavior, while perceived COVID-19 risk was negatively related to subjective well-being. This paper concludes by offering some suggestions for future studies and pointing out limitations of the present study.
Article
Full-text available
“Smart” or “precision” farming has revolutionized crop agriculture but its application to livestock farming has raised ethical concerns because of its possible adverse effects on animal welfare. With rising public concern for animal welfare across the world, some people see the efficiency gains offered by the new technology as a direct threat to the animals themselves, allowing producers to get “more for less” in the interests of profit. Others see major welfare advantages through life-long health monitoring, delivery of individual care and optimization of environmental conditions. The answer to the question of whether smart farming improves or damages animal welfare is likely to depend on three main factors. Firstly, much will depend on how welfare is defined and the extent to which politicians, scientists, farmers and members of the public can agree on what welfare means and so come to a common view on how to judge how it is impacted by technology. Defining welfare as a combination of good health and what the animals themselves want provides a unifying and animal-centered way forward. It can also be directly adapted for computer recognition of welfare. A second critical factor will be whether high welfare standards are made a priority within smart farming systems. To achieve this, it will be necessary both to develop computer algorithms that can recognize welfare to the satisfaction of both the public and farmers and also to build good welfare into the control and decision-making of smart systems. What will matter most in the end, however, is a third factor, which is whether smart farming can actually deliver its promised improvements in animal welfare when applied in the real world. An ethical evaluation will only be possible when the new technologies are more widely deployed on commercial farms and their full social, environmental, financial and welfare implications become apparent.
Article
Full-text available
Background Conventional pig housing and management conditions are associated with gastrointestinal pathophysiology and disease susceptibility in early life. Developing new strategies to reduce both therapeutic and prophylactic antibiotic use is urgent for the sustainable swine production globally. To this end, housing methodology providing effective environmental enrichment could be a promising alternative approach to reduce antibiotic usage, as it has been proven to positively influence pig welfare and immune status and reduce susceptibility to infections. It is, however, poorly understood how this enriched housing affects systemic and local pulmonary immune status and gut microbiota colonization during early life. In the present study, we compared the effects of two housing conditions, i.e., conventional housing: (CH) versus enriched housing (EH), on immune status and gut microbiota from birth until 61 days of age. Results The expected benefits of enrichment on pig welfare were confirmed as EH pigs showed more positive behaviour, less aggression behaviour during the weaning transition and better human animal relation during the post weaning phase. Regarding the pigs’ immune status, EH pigs had higher values of haemoglobin and mean corpuscular volume in haematological profiles and higher percentages of T cells and cytotoxic T cells in peripheral blood. Furthermore, EH pigs showed higher ex vivo secretion of IL1ß and TNF-α after lipopolysaccharide stimulation of whole blood than CH pigs. The structure of the developing faecal microbiota of CH and EH pigs significantly differed as early as day 12 with an increase in the relative abundance of several bacterial groups known to be involved in the production of short chain fatty acids, such as Prevotella _2, Christensenellaceae _R_7_group and Ruminococcus gauvreauii group. Furthermore, the main difference between both housing conditions post weaning was that on day 61, CH pigs had significantly larger inter-individual variation of ileal and colonic microbiota than EH pigs. In addition to housing, other intrinsic factors (e.g., sex) were associated with gut microbiota development and immune competence. Conclusions In addition to the known welfare benefits for pigs, environmentally enriched housing also positively drives important aspects of the development of the immune system and the establishment of gut microbiota in early life. Consequently, EH may contribute to increasing productivity of pigs and reducing antibiotic use.
Article
Full-text available
Under commercial conditions turkeys are housed in large groups in poorly structured environments. This leads to stress and subsequently to pecking and cannibalism. Environmental enrichment is suggested to reduce stress and feather pecking, thus leading to an increase of the overall flock health. However, the effect of increasing age on the use of enrichment elements and on the behavior repertoire as well as its correlation with health parameters has scarcely been studied. Therefore, our objective was to investigate the influence of environmental enrichment on the behavioral repertoire and on health parameters of turkeys. In three consecutive trials, female turkeys were housed up to 12 weeks either in an unstructured (control group) or enriched environment (EE group) featuring elevated plateaus at different levels (“turkey tree”). Behavior parameters, clinical health, and immune parameters were determined at selected time points. The percentage of birds using the turkey tree increased with age up to 55-77% at 22-30 days post hatch (dph). Thereafter, the number of birds located on the turkey tree decreased to 25-32% at 73 – 79 dph. Feather pecking and fighting was significantly lower in the EE group compared to the control group in two and three trials, respectively (p < 0.05). The integrity of feathers and integument, scored in the head/neck, wing and tail regions was repeatedly better in the EE birds compared to control birds at most investigated time points (p < 0.05), suggesting a reduction in stress related aggression by the use of the turkey tree. Head pecking, running and flying activity, foraging, and preening were overall comparable between the EE and the control group (p > 0.05). Humoral immunity as determined by vaccination-induced anti-Newcastle disease virus antibody titers, was not affected by the turkey tree use. The flow cytometric evaluation of blood monocyte and T-lymphocyte numbers showed no repeatable difference between control and EE groups. Interestingly, compared to the control groups, EE birds displayed significantly higher numbers of circulating MHC class II⁺ lymphocytes and lower numbers of thrombocytes at various time points compared to controls (p < 0.05). This study provides clear evidence that environmental enrichment with plateaus not only leads to an altered behavioral repertoire but also modifies some of the investigated immune parameters, implying that EE may have a modulatory effect on turkeys’ immunity and overall fitness. Further studies are needed to understand the correlation between behavior and health parameters in birds more closely.
Article
Full-text available
The immune system consists of a complex biological and psychological network designed for fighting against infections and to protect the body from pathogen factors, including the internal ones. In the past, for a long time inflammation and infectious diseases were thought to be only the result of the genetic heritage and the biological functioning of the body, when the pathogenic factors acted within the body. Studies in recent decades stressed the importance of psychological balance and mental health on the body immunity. Psychoneuroimmunology studies indicated the thoughts and emotional patterns, and the psychological dynamics are strongly interrelated with the immune response. Moreover, the immunological mechanisms not only regulates the health of the person, but they are also an important part of the individual adaptive process in the environment. In various studies, the results of each treatment modality (drug interventions and psychosocial interventions) were observed and compared in patients with mental health problems associated with immune reactions (inflammation). Psychosocial interventions suggest increased efficiency in reducing inflammation and improving immune system function.
Article
Full-text available
Objective: The current meta-analysis tested whether trait indicators of well-being associate with stressor-evoked physiological reactivity and recovery in healthy adults. Method: Medline, PsycINFO, and PubMed were used to identify relevant articles. Articles were included if they (a) measured cardiovascular or neuroendocrine (but not immune) physiology during or after an acute laboratory stress paradigm (b) measured indicators of hedonic well-being, eudaimonic well-being, or optimism, and (c) included healthy adult participants. Laboratory stress tasks included frustrating cognitive tasks, emotional recall tasks, and tasks involving social evaluation. Physiological variables were aggregated across cardiac (heart rate and cardiac output), hemodynamic (mean arterial pressure, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure), HPA (cortisol), and autonomic (high frequency heart rate variability, skin conductance, and catecholamines) markers. Twenty-seven studies were included (n = 3,390; 54.6% women). Effect sizes and confidence intervals were estimated using a random-effects model with pooled variance. Results: Contrary to expectations, optimism was associated with greater cardiac reactivity to cognitive stressors but did not associate with stress recovery. By contrast, hedonic well-being was associated with enhanced hemodynamic recovery following laboratory stressors but was not associated with stress reactivity. Conclusions: Hedonic well-being, but not optimism, could potentially buffer against the effects of psychological stressors on physiological responding by relating to more complete recovery. Identifying the mechanisms contributing to these patterns of association may provide insights into psychological interventions for well-being and stress-related disease risk. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
Article
Full-text available
This study addressed the impact of early and later life environmental enrichment, and their combination, on specific antibody responses and peripheral blood leukocyte subpopulations in pigs. Pigs were kept in either barren (B1) or enriched (E1) housing from birth, and half of the pigs switched to barren or enriched housing on day 47, resulting in four treatment combinations: B1B2, B1E2, E1E2, E1E2). Pigs were immunized with keyhole limpet hemocyanin-conjugated trinitrophenyl (KLH-TNP) on day 74 and 109 to induce primary and secondary antibody responses. Blood samples were taken weekly until day 130, and IgM and IgG antibody responses were measured. Leukocyte subpopulations were measured on day 74 and 130. Time course of the antibody responses was not affected by housing. Early life enrichment increased the IgG response to KLH, particularly the primary one. At day 74 the relative frequency of lymphocytes, DC and SLA-II expression on monocytes were higher in E1 pigs, whereas the percentage of granulocytes tended to be lower in E1 pigs at day 74. Early life enrichment increased the SLA-II expression on monocytes, the granulocyte to lymphocyte ratio, and tended to increase the percentage of granulocytes, but tended to decrease the percentage of monocytes at day 130. Later life enrichment reduced percentages of CD4+CD8α+ T cells before and after immunization and the SLA-II expression on monocytes at day 74, the percentage of granulocytes and the granulocyte to lymphocyte ratio at day 130. Notably, early and later life housing interacted in their effects on several immune parameters. KLH-IgM responses (both primary and secondary) were affected by the interaction between early and later life housing. IgM titers were higher for B1B2 than for E1E2, with the switched animals (B1E2 and E1B2) moving towards the titers of the animals kept in their later life environment from birth onwards. At day 130 the percentage of gamma delta T cells, CD8α+ cytotoxic T cells and DC were not different between pigs kept in B1B2 and E1E2, but there was a clear impact of the switch in housing conditions, particularly for the pigs that changed from barren to enriched housing. We also found effects of coping style (personality) and sex on some immune parameters. In conclusion, both early life and later life enrichment, and, notably a switch in housing conditions influenced specific antibodies and leukocyte subpopulations in pigs. The current study implies that the early life history of animals and the (mis)match with their current environment could thus be of major importance for their immune system. Further research is needed to investigate potential consequences for the pigs' health.
Article
Environmental changes pose significant threats to agricultural activities particularly animal production. These changes have induced major concerns which will negatively affect the poultry health and productivity under the current climate changes. Moreover, they also alter the immunological status of the exposed birds and make them susceptible to different diseases. The adverse effects of environmental stress also include poor performance of birds (reduced feed intake, growth, feed efficiency, immunity, and egg production) and inferior product quality. The adverse effect of heat stress on different quail breeds like Japanese quail, bobwhite quail, scaled quail, and Gambel's quail ranged from decreased growth rates (11.0–14.5%), body weight (7.7–13.2%), feed intake (6.1–21.6%), feed efficiency (4.3–8.6%), and egg production (6.6–23.3%). Also, birds reared under heat stress (34 °C) had significantly decreased Haugh units by 10.8% and egg weight by 14.3% in comparison with the control group (reared at 22 °C). On the other hand, increasing stoking density from 30 to 45 kg/m² also negatively affected the feed intake and body weight. Recent studies have focused on evaluating the potential adverse effects of different environmental stresses on poultry performance, behavior, welfare, and reproduction. It is imperative to understand better the interaction of different environmental factors and their subsequent effects on avian physiology, to spotlights on the effective management and nutritional strategies to alleviate the adverse effects of different stresses in poultry. This review aims to present a comprehensive overview of physiological manifestations of major environmental stresses including thermal stress (heat and cold stress) and high stocking densities on poultry health and production. Moreover, we have also critically evaluated the scope and efficacy of some potential strategies to mitigate the influences of these environmental stressors in different poultry species.
Article
Background Regular exercise is beneficial for adults with cardiovascular disease to improve psychological well-being. Tai Chi is a mind–body exercise thought to promote psychological well-being. Aim Examine the efficacy of Tai Chi in improving psychological well-being among persons with cardiovascular disease. Methods An electronic literature search of 10 databases (AMED, CINAHL, Embase, OpenGrey, PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science) was conducted. Clinical trials that examined one or more aspect of psychological well-being, incorporated a Tai Chi intervention among cardiovascular disease participants, and were published in English or German languages were included. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 2.0 software (Biostat, Inc.) was used to calculate the effect sizes (i.e. Hedges’ g) and the 95% confidence intervals using random effects models. Results A total of 15 studies met the inclusion criteria, enrolling 1853 participants (mean age = 66 years old, 44% women). Outcomes included: quality of life (QOL), stress, anxiety, depression, and psychological distress. When Tai Chi was compared with controls, significantly better general QOL (Hedges’ g 0.96; p=0.02, I ² =94.99%), mental health QOL (Hedges’ g=0.20; p=0.01, I ² =15.93) and physical health QOL (Hedges’ g=0.40; p=0.00, I ² =0%); with less depression (Hedges’ g=0.69; p=0.00, I ² =86.64%) and psychological distress (Hedges’ g=0.58; p=0.00, I ² =0%) were found. Conclusions Few Tai Chi studies have been conducted during the past decade examining psychological well-being among older adults with cardiovascular disease. Further research is needed with more rigorous study designs, adequate Tai Chi exercise doses, and carefully chosen outcome measures that assess the mechanisms as well as the effects of Tai Chi.
Article
Consumers perceive pasture-based systems of milk production as natural and therefore better for cow welfare than confinement systems. However both systems are heterogeneous and continually evolving, varying from total confinement to total pasture with many hybrid intermediaries. To compare the welfare of dairy cows in these various systems, we use the three spheres framework, comprising biological functioning, natural behaviour and affective states. Considering biological functioning, pasture-based cows are less at risk of subclinical and clinical mastitis, claw lesions, lameness, metritis, early embryonic mortality, culling and mortality, but at more risk of internal parasitism, malnutrition and delayed onset of oestrous activity postpartum than confined cows. Regarding natural behaviours, pasture-based cows exhibit less agonistic behaviour, better lying behaviour, more normal oestrous behaviours and better synchronicity of behaviours than confined cows. They also have the opportunity to graze, which is one of the main features of the behavioural repertoire of dairy cows, but, they may also experience long periods away from pasture in larger herds, and severe climatic stresses which will become increasingly important as the climate changes. Our current ability to assess the affective state of dairy cows is poor. For example, hunger is an important subjective state that cannot be measured directly. The growing focus on ensuring that animals have lives worth living, means that dairy cows should garner some positive emotions from their lives, and it seems clear that pasture access is essential for this. Clearly measurement of affective state is an important challenge for future dairy cow welfare research. At the extremes of management systems, there can be major differences in animal welfare but in hybrid systems, dairy cows experience elements of both confinement and pasture which may ameliorate the negative effects of each on cow welfare. Ultimately, the optimal system gives cows an element of choice between both environments. Moreover management of the system, whether it is confinement or pastured-based, may be as important as the system of management in ensuring good dairy cow welfare and addressing societal concerns.