Validação externa por correlação da avaliação do bem-estar animal de caninos em treinamento
Palavras-chave:
validação, bem-estar animal, componente animal, componente humano, treinamento caninoResumo
Estudos demonstraram a capacidade do olfato canino de detectar pessoas com doenças infecciosas. O bem-estar animal (BA) deve ser uma prioridade quando se trabalha com animais. O objetivo foi validar a avaliação do bem-estar animal de caninos em treinamento por meio da análise de correlação dos componentes humano e animal para determinar se ela é confiável. Observações, registros de comportamento e 5 meses de relatórios médicos foram usados para a coleta de dados. Ambos os componentes foram categorizados e avaliados. O BA por território foi classificado como "baixo" se a pontuação fosse de 0 a 67, "médio" se fosse de 68 a 135 e "alto" se fosse de 136 a 200. A categoria de bem-estar animal individual "alto" foi obtida em 5/9 caninos e o restante na categoria "médio". O BA por território foi "médio" com 133.6/200 pontos. A correlação de Spearman de 0,6 confirmou uma associação estatisticamente significativa (P < 0,5) entre os dois componentes do BA. A metodologia para a avaliação da BA aplicada a caninos em treinamento de olfato determinou uma categoria confiável e apropriada para os animais avaliados devido à correlação entre as variáveis dos componentes humano e animal.
http://dx.doi.org/10.21929/abavet2022.39
e2022-7
Referências
ARHANT C, Troxler J. 2014. Approach behaviour of shelter dogs and its relationships with the attitudes of shelter staff to dogs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 160:116–126. ISSN: 01681591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.08.013
BERTESELLI V, Arena L, Candeloro L, Dalla-Villa P, De-Massis F. 2019. Interobserver agreement and sensitivity to climatic conditions in sheltered dogs’ welfare evaluation performed with welfare assessment protocol (Shelter Quality protocol). Journal of Veterinary Behavior. 29:45–52. ISSN: 15587878.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2018.09.003
BROOM M. 2011. Bienestar animal: conceptos, métodos de estudio e indicadores. Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Pecuarias. 24(3):306–321. ISSN: 0120-0690.
https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=295022382010
CASTILLO-CUENCA C, Poblador-Hernández M, Cepero-Rodríguez O, Pérez-Bello A. 2012. Metodología para estimar el bienestar animal en perros y gatos como principales animales de compañía. Revista electrónica de Veterinaria. 13(6):1–28. ISSN: 1695-7504. https://es.calameo.com/read/0054495663a4929b0bc19
CHAVEZ G, Clementi G, Águila C, Ubilla J. 2020. Determinación del estado de bienestar en perros callejeros de dos centros urbanos de Chile. Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’OIE. 38(3):891–908. ISSN: 0253-1933. https://doi.org/10.20506/rst.38.3.3033
COBB M, Branson N, McGreevy P, Lill A, Bennett P. 2015. The advent of canine performance science: Offering a sustainable future for working dogs. Behavioural Processes. 110:96–104. ISSN: 03766357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2014.10.012
DANTAS-TORRES F, Ketzis J, Mihalca D, Baneth G, Otranto D, Tort P, Watanabe M, Linh K, Inpankaew T, Jimenez Castro D, Borrás P, Arumugam S, Penzhorn L, Ybañez P, Irwin P, Traub J. 2020. TroCCAP recommendations for the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of parasitic infections in dogs and cats in the tropics. Veterinary Parasitology. 283:109167. ISSN: 03044017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetpar.2020.109167
DAWKINS S. 2003. Behaviour as a tool in the assessment of animal welfare. Zoology. 106(4):383–387. ISSN: 09442006. https://doi.org/10.1078/0944-2006-00122
EDWARDS L, Browne M, Schoon A, Cox C, Poling A. 2017. Animal olfactory detection of human diseases: Guidelines and systematic review. Journal of Veterinary Behavior. 20:59–73. ISSN: 15587878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2017.05.002
ELSE H. 2020. Can dogs smell COVID? Here’s what the science says. Nature. 587(7835):530–531. ISSN: 0028-0836. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03149-9
FATTAH A, Hamid S. 2020. Influence of gender, neuter status, and training method on police dog narcotics olfaction performance, behavior and welfare. Journal of Advanced Veterinary and Animal Research. 7(4):655. ISSN: 2311-7710.
https://doi.org/10.5455/javar.2020.g464
GUILHERME-FERNANDES J, Olsson S, Vieira de Castro C. 2017. Do aversive-based training methods actually compromise dog welfare?: A literature review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 196:1–12. ISSN: 01681591.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2017.07.001
HEMSWORTH P, Mellor D, Cronin G, Tilbrook A. 2015. Scientific assessment of animal welfare. New Zealand Veterinary Journal. 63(1):24–30. ISSN: 0048-0169.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2014.966167
LEROY M, Ar Gouilh M, Brugère-Picoux J. 2020. The risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission to pets and other wild and domestic animals strongly mandates a one-health strategy to control the COVID-19 pandemic. One Health. 10:100133. ISSN: 23527714.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.onehlt.2020.100133
LÓPEZ-FERNANDEZ R, Avello-Martínez R, Palmero-Urquiza D, Sánchez-Gálvez S, Quintana-Álvarez M. 2019. Validación de instrumentos como garantía de la credibilidad de las investigaciones científicas. Revista cubana de medicina familiar. 48(1): e390. ISSN 0138-6557. http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?pid=S013865572019000500011&script=sci_arttext&tlng=pt
LÓPEZ DEL PJ, Abarca K, Azócar T. 2007. Evidencia clínica y serológica de rickettsiosis canina en Chile. Revista Chilena de Infectología. 24(3):189–193. ISSN: 0716-1018. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0716-10182007000300002
MANCILLA-TAPIA J, Lozano-Esparza V, Orduña-Cabreras A, Osuna-Chávez R, Robles-Zepeda R, Maldonado-Cabrera B, Bejar-Cornejo J, Ruiz-León I, González-Becuar C, Hielm-Björkman, Novelo-González A, Vidal-Martínez V. 2022. Dogs Detecting COVID-19 from Sweat and Saliva of Positive People: A Field Experience in Mexico. Frontiers in Medicine. Infectious diseases – Surveillance, prevention and treatment. Versión aceptada 28/02/2022. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmed.2022.837053/abstract
MARITI C, Raspanti E, Zilocchi M, Carlone B, Gazzano A. 2015. The assessment of dog welfare in the waiting room of a veterinary clinic. Animal Welfare. 24(3):299–305. ISSN: 09627286. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.24.3.299
MARTÍNEZ D, Torres M, Koyoc E, López K, Panti A, Rodríguez I, Puc A, Dzul K, Zavala J, Medina A, Chablé J, Manrique P. 2016. Evidencia molecular de Rickettsia typhi en perros de una comunidad rural de Yucatán, México. Biomédica. 36:45–50. ISSN: 0120-4157. https://doi.org/10.7705/biomedica.v36i2.2913
MUÑOZ-RASCÓN P, Morgaz-Rodríguez J, Galán-Rodríguez A. 2021. Manual clínico del perro y el gato. Barcelona, España. Editorial Elsevier España, S.L.U. Pp. 48-54. ISBN: 978-84-9113-838-9.
PARAMIO-MIRANDA A. 2010. Psicología y aprendizaje del adiestramiento del perro. Barcelona, España. Editorial Díaz de Santos. Pp. 31. ISBN: 978-84-7978-961-9.
POLGÁR Z, Blackwell J, Rooney J. 2019. Assessing the welfare of kennelled dogs-A review of animal-based measures. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 213:1–13. ISSN: 01681591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2019.02.013
POLGÁR Z, Kinnunen M, Újváry D, Miklósi Á, Gácsi M. 2016. A test of canine olfactory capacity: Comparing various dog breeds and wolves in a natural detection task. PLOS ONE. 11(5):e0154087. ISSN: 1932-6203. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154087
PRADA-TIEDEMANN A, Ochoa-Torres X, Rojas-Guevara U, Bohorquez A. 2019. Incidencia de la discriminación de olor en el entrenamiento de los equipos caninos detectores de sustancias: impacto de su evaluación para la certificación final. Revista Logos, Ciencia & Tecnología. 12(1):31–44. ISSN: 2145549X.
https://doi.org/10.22335/rlct.v12i1.1003
RODRÍGUEZ-MARTÍN, JL, Casado-Collado, A. 2002. Doble ciego. El control de los sesgos en la realización de ensayos clínicos. Contradicciones, insuficiencias e implicaciones. Medicina Clínica. 118(5):192-195. ISSN: 0025-7753
RUIZ D, Ramírez P, Múnera M, Arroyave C, Castaño L, López P. 2019. Comparison of secnidazole and fenbendazole for the treatment of asymptomatic Giardia infection in dogs. Veterinary Science Research. 1(1):24–28. ISSN: 26613867.
https://doi.org/10.30564/vsr.v1i1.1067
SALAS M, Manteca X. 2016. Assesing welfare in zoo animals: animal-based indicators. www.zawec.org
SCHILDER H, Vinke M, Van der Borg M. 2014. Dominance in domestic dogs revisited: Useful habit and useful construct? Journal of Veterinary Behavior. 9(4):184–191. ISSN: 15587878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jveb.2014.04.005
Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación. 1999. Especificaciones técnicas para la producción, cuidado y uso de los animales de laboratorio. NOM-062-ZOO-1999, México: Diario Oficial de la Federación, Pp. 107. https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachment/file/203498/NOM-062-ZOO-1999_220801.pdf
SEJIAN V, Lakritz J, Ezeji T, Lal R. 2011. Assessment methods and indicators of animal welfare. Asian Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advances. 6(4):301–315. ISSN: 16839919. https://doi.org/10.3923/ajava.2011.301.315
Servicio Nacional de Sanidad, Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria. 2012. Ley Federal de Sanidad Animal. México: Diario Oficial de la Federación. Pp. 20. https://www.gob.mx/senasica/documentos/ley-federal-de-sanidad-animal
STELLATO AC, Flint HE, Widowski TM, Serpell JA, Niel L. 2017. Assessment of fear-related behaviours displayed by companion dogs (Canis familiaris) in response to social and non-social stimuli. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 188:84-90. ISSN: 01681591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2016.12.007
TANGTRONGSUP S, Scorza V. 2010. Update on the diagnosis and management of Giardia spp infections in dogs and cats. Topics in Companion Animal Medicine. 25(3):155–162. ISSN: 19389736. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.tcam.2010.07.003
TEMPLE G, Gradin T, Rollin B, Stafford J, Mellor D, Vogel K, Rushen J, Pasillé M, Edwards L, Widowski T, Woods J, Karreman H, Fulvider W. 2021. Improving animal welfare: a practical approach. Boston, MA. USA. Editorial CAB International. Pp. 19. https://books.google.com.mx/books?hl=es&lr=&id=wXcREAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR3&dq=Grandin,+T.+2021.+Improving+Animal+Welfare:+A+Practical+Approach.+CABI+3rd+Edition.+441+&ots=TCKqB6t25T&sig=fX20SCFwPSZYfqLZI6eQEQi6JTQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false
TROISI CA, Mills DS, Wilkinson A, Zulch HE. 2019. Behavioral and cognitive factors that affect the success of scent detection dogs. Comparative Cognition & Behavior Reviews. 14:51–76. ISSN: 19114745. https://doi.org/10.3819/CCBR.2019.140007
VAN DER HARST E, Spruijt BM. 2007. Tools to measure and improve animal welfare: reward-related behaviour. Animal Welfare. 16(5):67–73. ISSN: 09627286.
VESGA O, Agudelo M, Valencia-Jaramillo F, Mira-Montoya A, Ossa-Ospina F, Ocampo E, Čiuoderis K, Pérez L, Cardona A, Aguilar Y, Agudelo Y, Hernández-Ortiz P, Osorio E. 2021. Highly sensitive scent-detection of COVID-19 patients in vivo by trained dogs. PLOS ONE. 16(9):e0257474. ISSN: 1932-6203.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0257474
WACKERMANNOVÁ M, Pinc L, Jebavý L. 2016. Olfactory sensitivity in mammalian species. Physiological Research. 65(3):369–390. ISSN: 1802-9973. https://doi.org/10.33549/physiolres.932955
WELLS L. 2009. Sensory stimulation as environmental enrichment for captive animals: A review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 118(1–2):1–11. ISSN: 01681591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.01.002
WHITHAM C, Wielebnowski N. 2013. New directions for zoo animal welfare science. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. 147(3–4):247–260. ISSN: 01681591.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2013.02.004
YAZDANI S, Bansal R, Prakash J. 2017. Drug targeting to myofibroblasts: Implications for fibrosis and cancer. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 121:101–116. ISSN: 0169409X. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2017.07.010
