Applied Animal Behaviour Science Research Articles

Who’s testing and who’s being tested: A cautionary tale of citizen science within applied animal behaviour science

Citizen science has become a popular means to collect data in many research fields, including animal behaviour science. Using this approach has numerous potential benefits (e.g. larger sample sizes, decreased strain on resources, increasing the public’s engagement in science), but there are also issues and assumptions relating to data quality that should be considered. The aim of this study was to assess the reliability of a battery of game-like tests developed to assess behavioural flexibility in dogs. The battery was administered to samples of shelter dogs and owned dogs who had remained in homes long-term. From the two populations, four test groups were created: shelter dogs assessed by the principal investigator (n=85), shelter dogs assessed by shelter staff/volunteers (n=34), long-term owned dogs assessed by the principal investigator (n=21), and long-term dogs assessed by their owners (n=29). Shelter staff/volunteers and dog owners participated as “citizen scientists”. It is accepted that using less skilled “citizen” researchers increases the error within the data, but often claimed that this is offset by larger sample sizes. This implies that the increased error is random and not systematic. Whether who (citizen versus trained researcher) tested the group in a given context was associated with overall test item outcomes was evaluated. In two of the tests, the Alone Time Test and the Three-Toy Test, tester was found to be associated with outcomes. In the Alone Time Test, tester was associated with four items in the shelter dog samples and with three in the long-term owned dog samples. In the Three Toy Test, a series of subsequent items were contingent on the first, and the outcome of that initial item was related to tester. These results demonstrate that it is unwise to assume that the increased error from citizen science work is largely random and thus evened out by the use of a large sample of researchers. Unexpected systematic error might arise within citizen science projects so controls need to be introduced to test for these effects, so that unsound assumptions are not made. There may also be relatively unique factors, beyond researcher objectivity, to consider when using a citizen science approach to study domestic dogs, such as the bidirectional influence on behaviour of any emotional bond between the owner or shelter staff/volunteer and the dog being tested. These results highlight the need for quality checks and preliminary analysis to ensure the identification of any relevant tester effects.

Erratum: Eyestalk Ablation to Increase Ovarian Maturation in Mud Crabs.

Erratum: Eyestalk Ablation to Increase Ovarian Maturation in Mud Crabs.

How to stay within the scope of Applied Animal Behaviour Science when conducting research on ‘laboratory animals’?

How to stay within the scope of Applied Animal Behaviour Science when conducting research on ‘laboratory animals’?

An international perspective on ethics approval in animal behaviour and welfare research

Ethics assessment is essential in studies that involve animals as subjects, which includes research on animal behaviour and welfare. Although ethics review mechanisms within institutions are long established in many regions, processes may be non-uniform across different cultures, institutions, and geographical contexts. Harmonisation need not be the ultimate goal; instead, attention should be directed towards ways of improving ethics assessment with an animal-centred focus. Moreover, applied animal behaviour and welfare research sometimes involves human subjects (e.g., animal owners, farmers, caretakers, and consumers), the ethics of which is scarcely discussed. The International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE) has developed and revised its ethics guidelines to be applied to research articles submitted to the Society’s journal and conferences, and acknowledges the need to address this increasingly contentious issue from a global perspective. At the 2021 ISAE Annual Congress, a workshop on the ethical challenges in animal behaviour and welfare research was held twice. Participants (N ≈ 70) from several continents were presented with hypothetical research cases outlining different ethics scenarios. These scenarios were discussed in small groups, with each participant contributing experiences from their respective countries. More questions than answers were generated, and the mere action of involving researchers from different scientific cultures in a conversation is an important step towards greater insight and transparency. Significant variability in local ethics review requirements across jurisdictions was revealed. However, by focussing on improving transparency of reporting for both animal and human involvement in studies, particularly in the ethics statement and procedure description, ethics assessment by reviewers and editors can be enhanced. There is a need for continued dialogue on ethics within the animal behaviour and welfare research community.

Freeing the hens: Workshop outcomes for applying ethology to the development of cage-free housing systems in the commercial egg industry

Throughout the world, most laying hens producing eggs for human consumption are still kept in small, wire battery cages. Ethologists have well documented the behavioural needs of hens, and the way that battery cage confinement thwarts highly motivated behaviour and reduces hens’ quality of life. While cage-free alternatives are now being used around the world, the more challenging management in these systems has contributed to the slower than desired uptake that would be necessary for improving hens’ welfare. As part of the 2021 International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE) virtual conference, a workshop was held with the aim to identify solutions to the common challenges. Attendees were given information about cage-free production and then sectioned into breakout groups for discussion. Following the workshop, they were asked to participate in a short survey. Breakout sessions included the topics of stakeholder engagement and further research needs, as well as identification of solutions to the common challenges. Across the two days of the workshop, there were 80 participants, from 27 countries, mostly ethologists (both students and non-students), but including egg producers, and representatives from government and non-governmental (NGO) organizations. Of the 80 participants, 35 completed the survey. Participants generated many insightful and practical ideas in both the breakout rooms and in the survey, but one particularly salient theme was that solutions already exist and what is needed is greater education and dissemination of technical knowledge (half of survey responses from participants in the developed world and 42% of ethologist’s responses fit within the theme of established producers assisting new producers or producer education and training). This was further evidenced by the noted success of cage-free producers in a variety of different geographic areas, climates, production scales and in both developed and developing regions. It was concluded that cross-sector collaboration will be necessary to speed up the transition to cage-free housing, with roles to play by the producers’ egg buying customers (retailers), end consumers, government and NGOs, and researchers. There are multiple paths forward, with many different approaches possible simultaneously, and the potential to free many more hens from their cages is promising.

Castration and alternatives in pig: advantages and disadvantages

Castration and alternatives in pig: advantages and disadvantages

Limb preference and personality in donkeys (Equus asinus)

ABSTRACT Interhemispheric laterality has often been linked to different behavioural styles. This study investigates the link between limb preference and personality in donkeys. The sample consisted of 47 donkeys (Equus asinus), 30 males and 17 females. Limb preference was determined using observation of the leading limb in a motionless posture and personality was measured using the Donkey Temperament Questionnaire (French, J. M. (1993). Assessment of donkey temperament and the influence of home environment. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 36(2), 249–257. doi:10.1016/0168-1591(93)90014-G) completed by the donkeys’ keepers. A Principal Component Analysis obtained two components: Agreeableness and Extraversion. Age showed a positive relationship with Agreeableness, echoing trends in humans Donkeys did not show a population-level preference towards either side. Limb preference significantly predicted the trait difficult to handle: donkeys with a preference to keep the right foot forward when motionless were harder to handle. This study presents the first investigation into limb preference and personality in donkeys, although more research is needed to clarify whether there is a population-level limb preference bias in donkeys, and the relationship between limb preference and Agreeableness.

Difference in exploration and use of PET bottle and horseshoe for environment enrichment in piglets

Article Details: Received: 2020-10-20 | Accepted: 2020-11-27 | Available online: 2021-01-31 https://doi.org/10.15414/afz.2021.24.mi-prap.62-66 Abstract Attractivity of two different enrichment objects was investigated in paper. Eight piglets were housed in pen with slatted floor. Pen environment was enriched with two hanging objects – PET bottle and horseshoe. Interactions with enrichment objects were evaluated during two consecutive days. PET bottle was more attractive, total number of interactions was 600 on day 1 and 451 on day 2. Horseshoe has very low attractiveness, number of interactions on day 1 was only 64 and 74 on day 2. Exploration of more attractive object was decreasing between days. Exploration of less attractive object was increasing. We recommend use of different enrichment objects for prolonged duration of exploration and occupation by manipulation, but both objects should be attractive for piglets. Keywords: environment, enrichment, piglets, keyword, keyword References Averos, X., et al. (2010). A meta-analysis of the combined effect of housing and environmental enrichment characteristics on the behaviour and performance of pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science , 127(3-4), 73–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2010.09.010 Bolt, S. L. and George, A. J. (2019). The use of environmental enrichment on farms benefits animal welfare and productivity. Livestock, 24(4), 183–188. https://doi.org/10.12968/live.2019.24.4.183 Buijs, S. and Muns, R. (2019). A Review of the Effects of Non-Straw Enrichment on Tail Biting in Pigs. Animals , 9(10), 824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9100824 Chen, Ch. et al. (2020). A computer vision approach for recognition of the engagement of pigs with different enrichment objects. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture , 175, 105580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2020.105580 Council directive 2008/120/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2008/120/2019-12-14 (accessed on 15 October 2020). Elkmann, A. and Hoy, S. (2009). Frequency of occupation with different simultaneously offered devices by fattening pigs kept in pens with or without straw. Livestock Science, 124(1-3), 330–334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2008.12.008 Ernst, K. et al. (2018). Play behavior and environmental enrichment in pigs. Available online: https://www.wur.nl/upload_mm/e/f/b/6af2e2db-430e-4771-8f7d-6f5b974eab5e_final%20report%20ACT%202060%20juli%202018%20op%20website%20.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2020). Godyn, D. et al. (2019). Effects of environmental enrichment on pig welfare-A Review. Animals , 9(6), 383. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9060383 Jensen, P. (2002). The ethology of domestic animals . New York: CABI Publishing. Wood-Gush, D. G. M. and Beilharz, R. G. (1983). The enrichment of a bare environment for animals in confined conditions. Applied Animal Ethology , 10(3), 209–217. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3762(83)90142-6 Young, R. J. (2003). Enrichment for captive animals . Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science Ltd.

Sources of variation of antimicrobial use in Charolaise and Limousine beef breeds in Veneto region (Italy)

Sources of variation of antimicrobial use in Charolaise and Limousine beef breeds in Veneto region (Italy)

Efficiency of alfalfa granulated feed additive in balanced ration of Ukrainian Riding Horse

We established positive influence of granulated alfalfa feed on the growth, development intensity, and sport qualities of the race horses. We registered the increase in live weight of young horses, which consumed the full granulated alfalfa feed by 8.0-9.8%. These animals had a more pronounced constitutional breed type. Thus, at the age of 18 months, they outclassed their peers in main linear dimensions: they had higher values of thoracic development (by 4.6%), higher thoracic diameter (by 4.5%), higher body length (by 5.7%). At the age of 24 months, these advantages were 6.4, 8.2, and 6.0% respectively. We found that the colts and fillies in the experimental group at the age of 12 months outperformed the same year horses from the control group by 1.1% by the index of format. Further, at the age of 18 and 24 months, the animals of the experimental group outperformed their counterparts from the control group by 0.2 and 0.4%, respectively. In terms of breast circumference index, the advantage of the exerimentary group animals at the age of 12 months was 0.1%, at the age of 18 months - 1.7%, at the age of 24 months - 1.8%, respectively. Similar results were recorded for the compactness index, where the advantage at the age of 12 months was 1.2%, at 18 months - 1.9%, at 24 months - 2.3% respectively. The effective use of environmentally friendly feed is confirmed by the results of hematological blood tests. It was found that for the vast majority of indicators they correspond to the physiological norm. This blood composition naturally characterizes changes in horses during the whole period of research. The received hematological profile is the basic characteristic of the state of health of horses in the research enterprise.

Status of animal welfare research in zoos and aquariums: Where are we, where to next?

Research into the conditions that promote good animal welfare is essential to equip zoos and aquariums with the knowledge to create environments in which animals thrive. In order to collate the empirical information that is available regarding animal welfare in zoos and aquariums with regard to topics, methods and species, a systematic literature review was conducted of the primary peer-reviewed journals publishing zoo-based and welfare-based research. Journals included Animal Welfare, Animals, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, International Zoo Yearbook, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research, and Zoo Biology. The literature review spanned 2008–2017 and revealed that 7.6% (n=310) of reviewed publications (n=4,096) in these journals were zoo- or aquarium-based and animal-welfare focused. The main topics studied included enrichment, social conditions and enclosure design, while understudied topics included the welfare of ambassador animals, and the welfare impacts of sound and light. Behaviour was by far the dominant welfare parameter used and the use of hormonal measures declined over this period. Taxonomic representation in these publications was notably skewed. Mammals were the focus of 75% of studies, and 82% of studies were vertebrate-focused (great apes being the dominant taxa). This study considers potential reasons for these patterns and highlights research areas for future emphasis that could serve to fill gaps in current knowledge regarding zoo and aquarium animal welfare, including more research into affective states that underlie an animal’s welfare status.

A bibliometric analysis of past and emergent trends in animal welfare science

AbstractA bibliometric analysis was undertaken to chart the development of animal welfare (AW) science as a whole, and of the individuals, organisations and countries that have had most academic impact to date. Publication data were collected from the Web of Science for the year range 1968-2017 and by-hand pre-processing of the data was undertaken to identify reviews and original research articles on AW. VOSviewer was used to create bibliometric networks. There has been a 13.3% annual growth in AW publications in the last 50 years with Animal Welfare and Applied Animal Behaviour Science the most frequent publishers of AW publications. Farm animals continue to dominate the subject of AW research and comparison of network visualisations for five key species suggested possible gaps in the research, such as relatively little emphasis on emotion research for some farm animals and little research on inherited disorders in dogs. However, keyword analysis indicated a recent broadening of AW findings to include other international contexts, such as conservation and sustainability. Highly cited review articles were grouped into five clusters with affective state (ie emotions, moods) and fish welfare the most recent topics. Almost all core authors of original research articles study farm animals, though in the last ten years other topics, such as consumer attitudes and wildlife, have emerged as highly cited areas of original research articles. Network analysis of organisations revealed the University of Bristol, UK as the main publisher of original research articles. Citation analysis indicated that many low-cited articles were originating from Germany and were published in German journals, suggesting that many worthwhile results and opinions on AW may be being missed by other researchers due to a language barrier. Several limitations of bibliometric analysis to generate an overview of AW science were identified, including the challenge of how to search and extract all the relevant publications in this discipline. In conclusion, animal welfare science is still in an exponential phase of growth which will bring opportunities, such as for the publication of new journals, but also challenges. The insights generated by this study suggest bibliometric analysis to be a useful addition to other approaches investigating the trends and concepts of animal welfare.

応用動物行動学における統計解析の進展(前編) : 一般線形モデル

応用動物行動学における統計解析の進展(前編) : 一般線形モデル

応用動物行動学における統計解析の進展 後編：一般化線形モデル

応用動物行動学における統計解析の進展 後編：一般化線形モデル

Applying behavior-analytic methodology to the science and practice of environmental enrichment in zoos and aquariums.

Environmental enrichment in zoos and aquariums is often evaluated at two overlapping levels: published research and day-to-day institutional record keeping. Several authors have discussed ongoing challenges with small sample sizes in between-groups zoological research and have cautioned against the inappropriate use of inferential statistics (Shepherdson, , International Zoo Yearbook, 38, 118-124; Shepherdson, Lewis, Carlstead, Bauman, & Perrin, Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 147, 298-277; Swaisgood, , Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 102, 139-162; Swaisgood & Shepherdson, , Zoo Biology, 24, 499-518). Multi-institutional studies are the typically-prescribed solution, but these are expensive and difficult to carry out. Kuhar ( Zoo Biology, 25, 339-352) provided a reminder that inferential statistics are only necessary when one wishes to draw general conclusions at the population level. Because welfare is assessed at the level of the individual animal, we argue that evaluations of enrichment efficacy are often instances in which inferential statistics may be neither necessary nor appropriate. In recent years, there have been calls for the application of behavior-analytic techniques to zoo animal behavior management, including environmental enrichment (e.g., Bloomsmith, Marr, & Maple, , Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 102, 205-222; Tarou & Bashaw, , Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 102, 189-204). Single-subject (also called single-case, or small-n) designs provide a means of designing evaluations of enrichment efficacy based on an individual's behavior. We discuss how these designs might apply to research and practice goals at zoos and aquariums, contrast them with standard practices in the field, and give examples of how each could be successfully applied in a zoo or aquarium setting.

Opinion of applied ethologists on expectation bias, blinding observers and other debiasing techniques

There is increasing evidence that the field of applied ethology is prone to expectation biases invalidating research outcomes. Nevertheless, outcome assessors are rarely blinded. We surveyed delegates of the International Society for Applied Ethology (ISAE) 2014 congress shortly before (n=39 respondents) and after (n=51 respondents) a combined congress plenary and workshop on expectation bias in applied ethology. The aims were to evaluate the effect of the plenary and workshop on the opinion of applied ethologists in order to better comprehend why blinding outcome assessors seems so rarely practiced as a debiasing technique in this field of research. The results suggest that a moderate awareness about expectancy effects among ethologists and the logistic constraints of blinded observations rather than a perceived low susceptibility of the research field is the larger part of the explanation. Although awareness about expectancy effects and debiasing techniques was higher immediately after than before the congress plenary and workshop, a more sustained and concerted effort is needed throughout all stages of the research process to avoid expectation bias invalidating research finding and to improve the scientific credibility of the field of applied ethology.

Reactions of sheep towards three sets of emotional stimuli: (In)Consistency in respect to stimulus valence and sheep identity

There is an increasing interest in affective states in applied animal behaviour science, because these states are thought to reflect welfare from the perspective of the animals. Also, it can be expected that individuals differ in how they consistently react to emotional challenges. Recently, we conducted three experiments in which the same sheep were repeatedly confronted with either physical, social or thermal stimuli that presumably varied in their valence. These sheep had been housed in either unpredictable, stimulus-poor or predictable, stimulus-rich housing conditions in order to manipulate their long-term mood. When the sheep were exposed to the stimuli, we measured general activity, ear movements, ear postures and frontal cortical haemodynamic changes as indicator variables for their emotional reaction. In the meta-analysis presented here, we searched for effects of the presumed valence and mood state on the indicator variables. Furthermore, we investigated the unexplained between- versus within-subject variability as an indicator of personality. Deoxy- [HHb] and oxy-haemoglobin concentrations [O2Hb] as well as general activity showed weak linear relationships with presumed valence. Sheep from the unpredictable, stimulus-poor housing conditions were generally more active and showed more ear movements, higher absolute [HHb], more transverse ears and less left-forward ears than sheep from the predictable, stimulus-rich housing conditions. However, these differences were small. The ratio of between- to within-individual variability was very low indicating little consistency in individual reactions. In conclusion, we found only weak evidence that presumed valence had a consistent effect on the indicator variables for emotional reactions in a given sheep, and these reactions were not modulated by presumed mood. Also, there was little indication that the sheep reacted in a way reflecting an individualised personality.

The use of animal‐based measures to assess animal welfare in the EU – state of art of the last 10 years of activities and analysis of the gaps. Preparatory work

EFSA Supporting PublicationsVolume 12, Issue 11 902E External scientific reportOpen Access The use of animal-based measures to assess animal welfare in the EU – state of art of the last 10 years of activities and analysis of the gaps. Preparatory work Flaviana Gottardo, Flaviana Gottardo Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health – University of PadovaSearch for more papers by this authorBarbara Contiero, Barbara Contiero Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health – University of PadovaSearch for more papers by this authorMarta Brscic, Marta Brscic Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health – University of PadovaSearch for more papers by this author Flaviana Gottardo, Flaviana Gottardo Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health – University of PadovaSearch for more papers by this authorBarbara Contiero, Barbara Contiero Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health – University of PadovaSearch for more papers by this authorMarta Brscic, Marta Brscic Department of Animal Medicine, Production and Health – University of PadovaSearch for more papers by this author First published: 13 November 2015 https://doi.org/10.2903/sp.efsa.2015.EN-902Citations: 2 The present document has been produced and adopted by the bodies identified above as authors. This task has been carried out exclusively by the authors in the context of a contract between the European Food Safety Authority and the authors, awarded following a tender procedure. The present document is published complying with the transparency principle to which the Authority is subject. It may not be considered as an output adopted by the Authority. The European Food Safety Authority reserves its rights, view and position as regards the issues addressed and the conclusions reached in the present document, without prejudice to the rights of the authors. Published date: 13 November 2015 AboutPDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL References Anderson US, Kelling AS and Maple TL, 2008. Twenty-five years of zoo biology: a publication analysis. Zoo Biology, 27, 444– 457. doi: 10.1002/zoo.20177. EFSA Panel on Animal Health and Welfare (AHAW), 2012. Statement on the use of animal-based measures to assess the welfare of animals. EFSA Journal 2012; 10(6):2767, 29 pp. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2767. Goulart VD, Azevedo PG, Van de Schepop J A, Teixera CP, Barcante L, Schetini de Azevedo C and Young RJ, 2009. GAPs in the study of zoo and wild animal welfare. Zoo Biology, 28, 561– 573. doi: 10.1002/zoo.20285. Keeling L and Veissier I, 2005. Developing a monitoring system to assess welfare quality in cattle, pigs and chickens. Proceedings Conference on Welfare Quality. Science and Society Improving Animal Welfare, Brussels, Belgium, 46– 50. Main DJC, Kent JP, Wemelsfelder F, Ofner E and Tuyttens FAM, 2003. Applications for methods of on-farm welfare assessment. Animal Welfare, 12, 523– 528. Main D, Whay H, Leeb C and Webster A, 2007. Formal animal-based welfare assessment in UK certification schemes. Animal Welfare, 16, 233– 236. Schetini de Azevedo C, Fernandes Cipreste C and Young R. J, 2007. Environmental enrichment: a GAP analysis. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 102, 329– 343. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.034. Webster AJF, Main DCJ and Whay HR, 2004. Welfare assessment: indices from clinical observation. Animal Welfare, 13, S93– S98. Welfare Quality®, 2009. Welfare Quality® assessment protocol for cattle, pigs and poultry. Welfare Quality® Consortium, Lelystad, The Netherlands. Whay HR, Main DCJ, Green LE and Webster AJF, 2003. Animal-based measures for the assessment of welfare state of dairy cattle, pigs and laying hens: consensus of expert opinions. Animal Welfare, 12, 205– 217. Winckler C, Capdeville J, Gebresenbet G, Hörning B, Roiha U, Tosi M and Waiblinger S, 2003. Selection of parameters for on-farm welfare-assessment protocols in cattle and buffalo. Animal Welfare, 12, 619– 624. Citing Literature Volume12, Issue11November 2015902E ReferencesRelatedInformation

Systematic review of the effect of perch height on keel bone fractures, deformation and injuries, bone strength, foot lesions and perching behavior

This report provides a summary of four systematic reviews on the impact of perch height on laying hen keel bone fractures, deformation and injuries, bone strength, foot lesions and perching behavior. After conducting a scoping review and identifying outcomes of interest, the review protocols were developed. An extensive literature search was conducted in information sources such as CABI, PUBMED and relevant conference proceedings. 1518 abstracts were assessed for relevance and 9 studies reported perch use and 1 reported keel injuries. No studies reported summary effect sizes; therefore it was not possible to conduct a meta-analysis. In lieu of a formal meta-analysis, a descriptive analysis was conducted, which plotted reported perch height against metrics of perch use. This descriptive analysis was not able to account for lack of independence, differences in sample size and other importance sources of heterogeneity such as cage height. The descriptive analysis suggested a positive association with metrics that measured perch use and height, i.e., increased usage was associated with increased height. © European Food Safety Authority, 2015

The Science of Animal Behavior and Welfare: Challenges, Opportunities, and Global Perspective.

Animal welfare science is a relatively new scientific discipline, evolving mostly from within veterinary medicine over the latter half of the twentieth century into an independent specialty in its own right. Originally, the field of study was heavily focused on animal behavior (ethology), but it has emerged into a truly multi- and inter-disciplinary science, encompassing such sciences as behavior, physiology, pathology, health, immunology, endocrinology, and neuroscience, and influenced by personal and societal ethics. The first academic organization devoted to the scientific study of animal welfare was established in 1966 as the society for veterinary ethology (SVE), demonstrating its veterinary roots by being then affiliated with the British Veterinary Association. The world’s first Professor of Animal Welfare was appointed 20 years later at the University of Cambridge’s Department of Clinical Veterinary Medicine, and in 1991, the SVE became the International Society for Applied Ethology, in recognition of its geographical spread and its evolution from veterinary medicine. Over the last quarter of a century, there has been further expansion of the field and now animal welfare science is represented in many universities’ veterinary medicine and animal science departments across the world. Animal welfare science has become part of the core curriculum for many veterinary degrees, is a recognized specialty qualification within the veterinary professions of Europe, USA, and Australia and courses in animal welfare science as a stand-alone discipline are offered worldwide at Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctorate degree levels. Within research, there have been similar patterns of expansion and a spread from a heavy focus on farm animal welfare to the welfare of zoo, laboratory, and companion animals and the impacts of humans on wildlife. There continue to be studies that compare the welfare of populations within systems, but there is also more attention given to gaining in-depth knowledge of the welfare of individual animals, knowing that populations are not homogenous and that individuals within the same system may be experiencing quite different welfare states. We not only continue to use “traditional” welfare indicators but also work to develop novel indicators for use in experimental settings or in the field. As our fundamental knowledge base increases, we look for increasing application and we respond to challenges that arise from our own research questions and findings and from societal needs. In this paper, I will focus on a number of the areas that I see represent Grand Challenges within our discipline.