Duration: 10/01/2026 to 09/30/2031

Administrative Advisor(s):

NIFA Reps:

Non-Technical Summary

There is widespread public concern regarding animal welfare in the United States. In response, numerous stakeholders have developed animal care standards and assessment methodologies intended to ensure adequate animal welfare within human-managed systems. However, as human-managed animal systems continue to change, there is a consistent need for up-to-date animal welfare information to guide animal care standard development.

Individuals with expertise in the study of animal behavior, animal physiology, and animal welfare science are uniquely positioned to generate and communicate science-based information related to animal welfare. Science-based animal welfare information can be used to ensure adequate animal care across species, life stages, and contexts.

Members of NC1029 work collaboratively to 1) develop relevant animal welfare measurement methods, 2) inform animal care standards and assessment methodologies, 3) engage stakeholders and the public to identify animal welfare perspectives and areas of concern, and 4) investigate species-specific animal welfare needs.

Statement of Issues and Justification

There is widespread public concern regarding animal welfare in the United States. Evidence for this concern, and how it affects the long-term sustainability of animal use, is apparent in numerous stakeholder initiatives to develop standards of animal care and verify their compliance through auditing and assessment programs. Specific examples include the North American Meat Institute Animal Handling Guidelines & Audit Guide, United Egg Producer’s Certified Animal Welfare Program, National Chicken Council Animal Welfare Guidelines and Audit Checklist For Broilers and Broiler Breeders, National Dairy Farmers Assuring Responsible Management (FARM) Program, and the National Pork Board’s Common Swine Industry Audit. Similarly, the Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching (commonly referred to as “The Ag Guide”) is widely utilized by agricultural universities as their basis for compliance with institutional animal care and use oversight. Animal care standards are also provided within the World Organisation of Animal Health’s (WOAH) Terrestrial and Aquatic Animal Health Codes, indicating the importance of animal welfare in international trade. Taken together, these programs demonstrate a continued need and widespread support for science-based animal welfare recommendations to adequately inform animal care standards.

Through NC-1029, we have established a national scientific committee to generate and disseminate objective scientific information on animal welfare issues. This committee is composed of approximately 40 scientists working in multiple disciplines at different locations throughout North America. Our research is critical for providing the science and technology to help relevant stakeholders make informed decisions about standards of animal care.

 

Related, Current and Previous Work

Station Abbreviations and Representatives (2021 - 2026)

Auburn University (AL; B. Baker-Cook, D. Bourassa); University of Arkansas (AR; S. Weimer); University of California-Davis (CA: E. Abdelfattah, R. Blatchford, J. Gross, K. Horback, M. Makagon, C. Moody, C. Tucker); University of Florida (FL; E. Miller, Cushon, C. Wickens); University of Illinois (IL; A. Green-Miller); Purdue University (IN; L. Brito, C. Croney, M, Erasmus, H. Neave); Iowa State University (IA; A. Johnson, D. Thomson); Michigan State University (MI; J. Siegford); University of Minnesota (MN; G. Cramer, M. Endres, W. Knauer); Mississippi State University (MS; H. Muraco); University of Nebraska-Lincoln (NE; A. Desaulniers); North Dakota State University (ND; C. Byrd); Oregon State University (OR; M. Udell); Clemson University (SC; A. Ahmed, J. Jones); Spain (SP; M. de la Varga Alonso); Tarleton State University (TSU; J. Leatherwood); University of Tennessee, Knoxville (TN; B. Downey); Texas A&M (TAM; G. Archer, C. Daigle); Texas Tech University (TTU; N. Anderson); University of Vermont (VT; J. Costa) Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VA; L. Jacobs); University of Wisconsin-Madison (WI; S. Adcock, J. Van Os)

There are several current multi-state projects that incorporate animal welfare into their objectives but differ from NC1029. These include NC1211 (Precision Management of Animals for Improved Care, Health, and Welfare of Livestock and Poultry), NCERA219 (Swine Production Management to Enhance Animal Welfare), NE2248 (Mastitis Resistance to Enhance Dairy Food Safety, Milk Quality, and Animal Welfare), W4172 (Impacts of Stress on Performance, Health, and Well-Being of Animals), and S1094 (Genomic Tools to Improve Genomic Health, Wellbeing and Performance). Members of NC1029 may have overlapping interests and membership with these related multi-state projects, but NC1029 remains the only project that specifically focuses on 1) the study of animal behavior for guiding welfare recommendations in the United States, 2) developing behavioral and physiological animal welfare indicators for use in human-managed paradigms, and 3) evaluating the interface between moral frameworks and scientific evaluation of animal welfare.

Objective 1 (NC1029; 2021-2026):  To develop novel behavioral and physiological indicators of animal welfare or apply existing measures to generate novel knowledge or applications.

The majority of our members’ previous work falls under Objective 1 of the 2021-2026 NC1029 proposal, which is intended to facilitate the development of novel indicators to measure animal welfare and apply existing animal welfare measures to new or emerging contexts. Below, we provide examples of the work our NC1029 representatives conducted to meet Objective 1.

Behavioral Indicators of Animal Welfare

Reliable assessment and interpretation of animal behavior is crucial for improving animal welfare under human-managed paradigms. Stakeholders (scientists, veterinarians, animal caretakers) actively utilize animal behavior to gain insight into animals’ experiences, particularly related to biological functioning (i.e., animal health, productivity) and affective states. Several members of NC1029 have incorporated behavioral measurement into their work to better understand how factors like management systems, husbandry methods, social interaction, pain, cognition, and affective states relate to the performance of both normal and abnormal behaviors in multiple species. 

Social Behavior

In dairy cattle, FL evaluated the relationship between social behavior, individual attributes, such as health status (Gingerich et al., 2025) and personality (Gingerich et al., 2023). FL also assessed how early social experiences, as influenced by pre-weaning social housing, are related to long-term outcomes with relevance for animal welfare, including growth development (Lindner et al., 2025) and behavioral response to regrouping (Clein et al., 2024). MI investigated affiliative behaviors and constructed behavioral time budgets in group-housed pigs as a means to better understand social aggression (O’Malley et al., 2021; O’Malley et al., 2022). ND evaluated feeding and aggressive behaviors, in conjunction with physiological indicators, to determine their effectiveness for characterizing social hierarchies and reproductive performance in group-housed sows (Sommer et al., 2023, 2024). ND also evaluated the effect of social stress resulting from piglet cross fostering on pig behavior.

OR focused on the development of novel behavioral methods and approaches to evaluating inter- and intra-species social behavior, and the impact of attachment quality, social experience and human-animal interactions on stress, stress-resilience and animal success/productivity (Bentosela et al. 2024; Stahl et al. 2024; Tananaeva & Udell, 2024). For example, OR developed and implemented efficient low-cost attachment assessments - based on assessments originally developed for use with lab animals and then used in human child psychology- for use with dogs, cats, and livestock (Udell, 2021). By translating and standardizing behavioral assessments across species, OR’s work strengthens the scientific basis of animal welfare assessments and standards by enabling the generation of comparative data, allowing us to compare and extend research findings across different animal management settings (Udell, 2022a; Udell, 2024).

Abnormal Behavior and Pain

CA, FL and TN have each conducted collaborative research related to abnormal oral behaviors in cattle and horses. CA and TN investigated the importance of forage for populations of cattle where access is typically limited, namely milk-fed dairy calves and finishing cattle in feedlots. In this area, CA and TN provided 24-h information about rumination and abnormal oral behaviors in calves as they relate to the type of solid feed provided (Downey et al., 2022, Downey and Tucker, 2023; Goeller et al., 2023). CA and TN’s findings indicate that forage provision affects calf behavior, including responses to novelty (Morrow et al., 2023). They also found that feedlot cattle are motivated to gain access to both forage and additional allocation of high-concentrate feeds, demonstrating that these are more curious and explorative than previously understood (Coon and Tucker, 2023, 2024a; 2024b). FL conducted research examining abnormal oral behaviors in calves (Doyle and Miller-Cushon, 2023) and cribbing in horses (Arias-Esquivel et al., 2024).

CA deepened our understanding of how common, painful management practices affect dairy calves. They found that common methods of disbudding, for example, result in long-lasting wounds (Drwencke et al., 2023, 2025 a,b) that change calf behavior for days to weeks after initial tissue damage (Adcock et al., 2023). WI’s investigation of neonatal tail docking in sheep found that tail wounds required approximately 6 weeks to heal and were frequently infected, raising welfare concerns (Woods and Adcock, 2025a). Although maternal behavior was unaffected, docked ewes showed reduced sexual attractivity and receptivity compared to their undocked twins, suggesting possible reproductive consequences (Woods and Adcock, 2025b; 2025c). WI also identified neuroma-like formations in docked lambs’ tail stumps, indicating the potential for long-lasting changes in pain sensitivity. ND and collaborators developed novel gel formulations containing natural products to investigate their use for reducing surgical castration pain and improving wound healing in piglets (Olatinwo et al., 2025a; 2025b; Shevtsova et al., 2025). MN investigated the use of white willow bark for alleviating inflammatory pain in dairy calves post-disbudding (Phillips et al., 2021).

Animal Personality, Cognition, Affective States

Behavioral measurement (often in conjunction with physiological measures) provides a meaningful indirect method for understanding cognitive abilities and affective states across species. VA developed and/or validated behavioral tests to assess cognitive bias in broiler chickens, laying hens, pigs, and rainbow trout in order to determine affective states. VA’s work in this area with broiler chickens utilizes behavioral responses that could implicate either positive emotions or boredom, with the latter rarely quantified in the species. IN focused on developing and applying cognitive, behavioral, and physiological methodologies to assess emotional states in dairy cattle, including work on mental-state assessment and cattle cognition. IN advanced validation of positive welfare indicators by evaluating ear posture, grooming behavior and reviewing measures of mental state, including positive affect (Neave, 2025) and cognitive capabilities (Proudfoot et al., 2025) in dairy cattle. CA investigated the effects of rearing pullets with vertical structures on spatial cognition development as a means to better understand the occurrence of keel bone injuries in cage-free aviary systems (Jones et al., 2023).

CA, IN, and VT each investigated the relationship between animal personality and animal welfare outcomes. VT demonstrated strong links between personality traits, disease response, feeding behavior, growth, and welfare outcomes (Woodrum Setser et al., 2023; Woodrum Setser et al., 2024; Michalski et al., 2023). This includes foundational work on personality testing frameworks, optimism/pessimism, food neophobia, social behavior, and activity patterns measured with PLF tools. CA’s work focused on identifying links between personality traits and welfare for breeding cows (Creamer and Horback, 2024), sows (Horback & Parsons, 2022; Kranz et al., 2022), and ewes (Schiller et al., 2023; Schiller and Horback, 2024a). Their findings indicate that welfare concerns related to group housing in sows can be addressed when considerations are given to the group composition (e.g., age and size of sows), pen mixing practices (e.g., pre or post breeding), feeding schedule (e.g., collective [trough, floor fed] or individual [electronic sow feeding, free access stalls]), and, pen structural quality (e.g., flooring, enrichment). Additionally, producers could increase financial returns per weaned pig by retaining sows which maintain pen integrity (rather than harmful social aggression). CA also developed and validated a behavioral profile of high-quality maternal ewes in order to improve the care provided to neonatal lambs, and thus, improve pasture-based sheep welfare (Schiller and Horback, 2024b). This work stemmed from an issue where shepherds have difficulty in maintaining ewes which are both protective of their lambs on pasture and show a reduced fear of humans during routine handling contexts (i.e., transport, pregnancy checks, and weaning). IN evaluated how personality traits modulate responses to illness and stressors in calves (Woodrum Setser et al., 2024), and adaptation to milking robots in cows (Schwanke et al., 2024). Additional work conducted by IN explored early illness detection in calves by linking personality traits with sickness behavior expression and identifying behavioral changes that precede clinical diagnosis (Welk et al., 2025).

Physiological Indicators of Stress and Animal Welfare

Physiological indicators provide meaningful information related to biological functioning, and are often used in conjunction with behavioral indicators to evaluate animal stress and welfare. CA focused on advancing welfare assessment and improving end-of-life, handling, and husbandry practices for commercially farmed aquatic species. Research on finfish (white sturgeon, rainbow trout, and salmonids) and farmed shellfish (red and black abalone) aimed to reduce stress, improve physiological resilience, and refine humane slaughter and euthanasia approaches. CA evaluated and validated humane slaughter tools for large finfish, including the use of non-penetrative captive bolt stunning for white sturgeon to reduce pre-slaughter stress and ensure effective loss of consciousness (Gross et al., 2024). Ongoing collaborative work assesses how slaughter method and packaging influence post-harvest quality and shelf life of rainbow trout, linking welfare status to food quality traits (Bashir et al., 2025). CA’s research in white sturgeon quantifies the impacts of dietary protein source on physiological health, inflammatory status, and robustness under farm conditions to improve feed formulation decisions that support welfare (Gross & Yang, 2024). We also develop and apply non-invasive tools that mitigate stress during broodstock management. Recent studies used ultrasonography to determine reproductive condition in red abalone (Boles et al., 2022) and endangered black and white abalone (Boles et al., 2023), establishing techniques directly transferable to farmed abalone hatcheries for reducing handling stress and improving spawning reliability. Across these studies, the unifying theme is generating applied, species-specific welfare knowledge that producers can integrate into their hatchery, grow-out, feeding, and slaughter practices to improve survival, reduce stress, and increase product quality in commercial aquaculture systems.

NE examined the effects of in utero heat stress and developmental exposure to agrichemicals on boar development and reproduction. These exposures can disrupt testis development and lead to long-term fertility consequences with implications for animal well-being and productivity. Using both classical and advanced molecular approaches, NE identifies specific biological processes perturbed in the testis at molecular, cellular, and whole-animal scales. This multi-level framework links early-life exposures to downstream fertility outcomes. Current work also evaluates whether sperm non-coding RNAs serve as sensitive biomarkers of early-life stress and potential mediators of intergenerational effects. Additional efforts by NE assess non-invasive stress monitoring tools in mature boars.

ND investigated the use of leukocyte coping capacity as an indirect measure of growing pig physiological stress resulting from an acute cycling heating period (Byrd and Young, 2023). TAM conducted research to develop non-invasive strategies for identifying sick cattle using canine olfaction (Juge et al., 2024). AL explored the use of physiological indicators of animal welfare to understand and optimize euthanasia methods during poultry harvest and slaughter. VA assessed the use of telomeres, a novel physiological indicator for animal welfare, in broiler chickens and found that environmental complexity tended to improve telomeric outcomes, suggesting a benefit to the cumulative chicken experience. TSU investigated equine gait kinematics and biomarkers in response to nutritional supplementation (Goehring et al., 2021; Martinez et al., 2021; Much et al., 2021; Valigura et al., 2021) and exercise (Silvers et al., 2021).

Development and Application of Technology for Measuring Animal Welfare

Advances in technology hold substantial promise for collection of both behavioral and physiological data related to animal welfare. Application of technologies within animal management systems, along with continued improvements in automation, artificial intelligence, and big data analytics, will allow for automated detection of animal health, production, and welfare states.

AR, MI, MN, SC, TAM, and VT focused on the development and application of technology for measuring animal behavior and physiology related to animal welfare. VT developed, validated, and applied precision livestock farming systems—including automated feeders, accelerometers, rumination/feeding collars, machine-learning diagnostic models, and real-time sensor platforms—to detect early signs of disease such as bovine respiratory disease, neonatal diarrhea, and respiratory challenges (Cantor & Costa, 2022; Cantor et al., 2024; Casella et al., 2022; Lovatti et al., 2024). This includes diagnostic accuracy studies, early-warning system development, and the classification of high-risk calves using feeder data (Cantor et al., 2024; Morrison et al., 2022). MN focused on evaluating autonomous vision technology for dairy cattle lameness detection (Swartz et al., 2025a) and determining the relationship between automated milk feeders, feeding behavior, and illness in dairy calves (Perttu et al., 2023; Peiter et al., 2023). SC developed and validated standardized image acquisition and image analysis protocols for quantifying musculoskeletal health in laying hens and sheep using radiography, computed tomography, and open-source image analysis software programs. TAM used computer vision, big data analytics, and sensor output to characterize behavioral phenotypes relevant to cows that are thermotolerant (Inadagbo et al., 2024). Behavioral startle tests were conducted on these animals to determine the physiological relationship between the serotonergic system and the startle response. AR focused on developing and applying behavioral and physiological indicators to assess welfare across commercial and divergently selected chicken breeds and production environments by utilizing wearable and noninvasive technologies. MI investigated the use of precision technologies (Han et al., 2023) and statistical methodologies (Davis et al., 2022; Han et al., 2022) for detecting lameness and social interactions in cattle and pigs, respectively.

Objective 2 (NC1029; 2021-2026):  To strengthen the scientific basis of animal welfare assessments and standards.

Governmental and industry animal welfare standards serve as the basis for large-scale animal care guidance globally. Robust animal welfare assessment methodologies are needed to verify compliance with accepted animal welfare standards. The second NC1029 objective attempts to strengthen the scientific basis of animal welfare standards and the assessment methodologies used for their verification. For example, sampling decisions, repeatability, and feasibility of measures within an assessment framework are important, but understudied, aspects of robust assessment. Additionally, several NC1029 members actively engage with a broad stakeholder base to better understand perspectives related to animal care and welfare in multiple species. These perspectives often play a role in the development and implementation of animal welfare standards. Below, we provide examples of the work our NC1029 representatives conducted to meet Objective 2.

Impact of Housing and Management on Animal Welfare Outcomes

Many modern animal management systems aim to improve animal welfare. However, as industries continue to move toward modern housing and husbandry methods, there is a need to determine best practices for ensuring animal welfare throughout an animal’s lifetime. OR generated novel knowledge about behavior and welfare outcomes of animal management practices, such as different rearing practices within dog breeding facilities (Stahl et al. 2024), how the bottle feeding of bummer lambs impacts stress response, behavior and relationships with human caregivers and other sheep later in life (Trice, 2023), and how quality of human handler-animal interactions influence animal stress and performance (Udell, 2022a). 

IN advanced knowledge of species-specific behavior and welfare needs of cows and calves in cow-calf contact systems, with a review on current and future directions for ethology and welfare research on cow-calf contact systems (Whalin et al., 2025), and understanding emotional, behavioral, and physiological responses of cows and calves in these systems (Neave et al., 2024). ND evaluated the use of early-life environmental interventions for improving swine welfare later in life (i.e., nursery ramp provision improves semi-trailer loading at market weight; Kasakamu et al., 2024). CA assessed the impact of the early rearing environment on dairy goat kid behavior and welfare. FL developed behavioral indicators of welfare in the ridden horse (Rodriguez et al., 2025).

AL, AR, AL, CA, IN, MI, SC, and TAMU each evaluated poultry management and housing related to animal welfare outcomes. AL investigated early-life behavioral indicators of poultry welfare and their relationship with long-term poultry welfare status (Jackson et al., 2025a; 2025b). AR investigated the production, behavior, immune response, and carcass traits of slow-growing compared to conventional broilers, as well as how air circulation, feeding strategy, and light wavelength impacts on the health and behavior of broilers and turkeys (McMillian et al., 2025; Oyeniran et al., 2025; Perretti et al., 2025; Snyder et al., 2022; Weimer et al., 2022). CA studied the use of tri-axial accelerometers to measure the effects of the chicken body louse, a common ectoparasite, on the behavior and welfare of laying hens (Murillo et al., 2024). IN identified factors associated with lameness, developed indicators associated with parasite infestation of laying hens (Holquinn et al., 2024), examined the link between the gut microbiome and poultry behavior and welfare (Fu et al., 2023), and investigated early behavioral indicators of later welfare concerns; these assessments are also being integrated into genomics analyses to identify novel heritable traits for improving poultry resilience and welfare (Mullim et al., 2024). MI assessed the influence of genetic strain and environmental complexity on exercise, perch use, and locomotion development in laying hens (Rentsch et al., 2023a; 2023b). SC focused their efforts on developing and validating activity-enhancing housing features, environmental enrichments, and lighting strategies that improve musculoskeletal development, reduce fearfulness, and enhance overall welfare in pullets and laying hens (Anderson et al., 2024; Clark et al., 2024; 2025). TAM evaluated the effectiveness of litter treatment products on litter pH, ammonia, and broiler paw scores (Grimes et al., 2025).

CA, IA, and IN utilized behavioral evaluations to investigate the benefits of environmental enrichment across species. CA investigated the efficacy of scatter feeding as an enrichment for broiler chickens (Wood et al., 2021). IA focused their efforts on biologically relevant environmental enrichment for neonatal pigs, nursery pigs, gilts, and sows in open pen gestation that can be used in North American swine systems (Bučková et al., 2025; Fortney et al., 2024a; 2024b; Sundman et al., 2022). IN applied welfare assessments to improve poultry welfare, including assessing environmental enrichment for poultry (Dong et al., 2023; Jacobs et al., 2023; Rasmussen et al., 2024).

Increasing Scientific Rigor Related to Animal Welfare Assessment Methodologies

            CA and TN developed a website aimed at improving scientific rigor to highlight best practices for assessing reliability, using animal behavior research as key examples (Tucker et al. 2025a; 2025b). CA and WI investigated how sampling choices affect behavioral outcomes in poultry species (Lu et al., 2025). MN evaluated the inter- and intra-observer reliability of multiple body condition scoring methodologies in dairy cattle (Swartz et al., 2025b).

Stakeholder Engagement to Identify Areas of Concern and Understand Perspectives Related to Animal Welfare

CA and IN conducted research related to veterinary care. Specifically, CA examined stakeholder-driven initiatives (e.g., veterinary telehealth) to improve access to pet health and behavior care (Boone et al., 2023; 2025; Lee et al., 2024). These projects bridged research and outreach by engaging pet owners, veterinarians, and shelter staff in data collection, while promoting evidence-based strategies (Carroll et al., 2022; Couture et al., 2022; Hare et al., 2025; Nakonechny et al., 2025). Given the novelty and lack of telehealth research, the results may be applicable across species and contexts. Collectively, these projects advance the use of animal-based measures that can be applied across contexts, (e.g., clinic to farm settings), with the overall aim of generating new knowledge and enhancing animal welfare. IN reviewed on-farm weaning methods and their effect on dairy calf behavior and welfare (Welk et al., 2024) and ruminants more broadly, targeting recommendations for veterinarians (Neave et al., 2025).

AR engaged with commercial stakeholders in the poultry industry to identify future challenges, opportunities, and research priorities that are important for the broiler industry. Similarly, VA collaborated with poultry stakeholders to obtain data from commercial processing plants to identify prevalence of welfare concerns related to the (pre)slaughter phase. VA is also currently conducting field trials at commercial broiler farms to assess the impact of platforms on broiler welfare and productivity. CA studied how housing and management decisions affect duck behavior (Broadus et al., 2022) and duck welfare outcomes (Makagon & Riber, 2022).

IN and MI collaborated on a review publication that highlighted the benefits and constraints of incorporating the five-domains model of animal welfare into industry auditing programs (Beausoleil et a., 2023). Additional work by MI attempted to identify barriers to adopting best management practices in the beef (Hopkins et al., 2022) and dairy industries (Ufer et al., 2022).

OR advanced research on how human emotions, beliefs, and perceptions influence perception of animal behavior and animal welfare assessments, a critical step in the development of future assessment tools and educational programs aimed at more accurate evaluations of animal behavior and welfare (Croney et al., 2023; Puitiza et al., 2025; Udell, 2022b; Udell et al., 2023). TTU focused on teaching animal welfare to undergraduate, graduate, and veterinary students using virtual farm tours (Anderson et al., 2025; Underwood et al., 2025). FL and MN assessed perceptions and practices regarding horse (Irvine et al., 2025) and dairy calf (Perttu et al., 2021) welfare.

Objectives

1. To develop novel behavioral and physiological indicators of animal welfare or apply existing measures to generate novel knowledge or applications.
   
2. To strengthen the scientific basis of applied research, on-farm and industry assessments and standards, and stakeholder engagement related to animal welfare.
   
3. To investigate animal behavior across relevant species, contexts, and life stages as a means to generate new knowledge related to species-specific animal welfare needs.
   

Methods

Abbreviations used in the Methods section of this proposal: University of Arkansas (AR); University of California-Davis (CA); University of Florida (FL); Purdue University (IN); Iowa State University (IA); University of Minnesota (MN); University of Nebraska-Lincoln (NE); North Carolina State University (NC); North Dakota State University (ND); Oregon State University (OR); Clemson University (SC); University of Tennessee, Knoxville (TN); Texas A&M (TAM); Texas Tech University (TTU); Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (VA); University of Vermont (VT); University of Wisconsin-Madison (WI)

Objective 1: To develop novel behavioral and physiological indicators of animal welfare or apply existing measures to generate novel knowledge or applications.

Behavioral and Physiological Indicators of Animal Welfare Status

CA, FL, NC, NE, VA, and WI will investigate novel behavioral and physiological indicators of animal welfare as a means to improve animal care, management, and housing.

CA will continue to evaluate the effects of wounds (including found on the udder, associated with udder cleft dermatitis) on cattle behavior. CA will investigate electroencephalography (EEG) as a neurophysiological indicator of consciousness and sentience during humane slaughter of farmed finfish. CA will evaluate relationships between EEG suppression patterns, behavioral reflex responses, ventilatory activity, and post-stun recovery potential to establish reliable criteria for assessing stunning effectiveness. In parallel, CA will assess cardiac physiology in farmed abalone using heart-rate measurements to quantify stress responses associated with handling and spawning. CA will continue to evaluate the genetic and environment implications of cage-free housing on keel damage in laying hens. CA will develop behavioral assays for resource use and mitigation as well as scoring systems for evaluating keel damage from digital x-rays. Other CA projects will evaluate management and resource availability in cage-free pullet housing to improve pullet welfare and behavioral opportunities.

FL will investigate horse behavioral responses to handling and painful procedures (i.e., blood draw with restraint), concurrent with physiological stress responses, to develop novel indicators of welfare. 

WI will continue to collect data on novel dairy heifer physiological stress responses to transport and begin to collect data on non-nutritive oral behavior and mammary gland development and integrity throughout the post-weaning period. This will include developing and validating a computer vision system to automate the detection of non-nutritive oral behavior as heifers grow.

NC will develop predictive models of lameness in broilers to assess and predict enterococcal lameness disease to better study methods of prevention and treatment. Additionally, NC will study the influence of vertically transmitted microbiome health and wellbeing of broilers, with a primary focus on chick quality and susceptibility of disease. Other NC efforts investigate the role of gut health on behaviors such as feather pecking in turkeys and drinking activity in broiler breeders.

NE will investigate the effects of in utero heat stress and developmental exposure to agrichemicals on testis development and long-term fertility in boars. NE will integrate endocrine, histological, and single-nuclei transcriptomic analyses to define the molecular and cellular pathways disrupted by these early-life stressors and identify sperm non-coding RNAs as potential biomarkers of developmental stress. Other NE projects will refine non-invasive physiological measures, including salivary metabolomics, to improve stress detection and welfare assessment in sexually mature boars.

FL, WI, and ND will investigate the role of social interactions on physiological stress, health, pain, and performance. FL and WI will evaluate how dairy calf social networks affect calf health, pain (in response to disbudding), and physiological stress (hair cortisol). ND will investigate the relationships between sow social networks, acute and chronic physiological stress measures, and sow reproductive performance.

IN, OR, and VA will dedicate a portion of their work to developing methodologies for evaluating cognition and affective states in multiple species. IN will investigate novel behavioral and physiological indicators of positive welfare using a cow-calf separation and reunion model targeting positive- and negative-valenced situations. IN will develop methodologies for assessing cognition and emotional states in adult dairy cattle by designing or refining tasks that evaluate attention bias, memory recall and recognition, learning ability and cognitive flexibility. Behavioral and physiological responses will be combined to validate these tasks as feasible indicators of affective state, and apply the tasks to understand how cows are affected by management practices. OR will develop, translate, and validate user-friendly cognitive and behavioral assessments with the aim of further extending the value and reach of behavior and welfare assessments for stakeholders and to aid future generation of comparative cross-species data sets. Target assessments will include adaptations of sociability and secure base attachment tests, inhibition tests, and the development of novel user-friendly stress/needs surveys. VA will continue working on applying, finetuning, and validating cognitive bias tasks and physiological indicators of animal welfare with an emphasis on identifying positive affective states in poultry species.

Technological Development and Application for Measuring Animal Welfare

AR, CA, IN, SC, TAM, TTU, and VT will focus their efforts on technological development and application for measuring welfare-relevant behavioral and physiological measures.

AR will continue to integrate technology into the assessment of poultry welfare in relation to their environment by exploring the multigenerational impacts of heat stress on the physiological and behavioral responses of broiler breeders and their progeny divergently selected for water efficiency. CA will develop and validate animal-based welfare indicators that can be applied through telehealth platforms. This work will assess the accuracy, reliability, and feasibility of behavioral and physiological measures collected remotely from animal caretakers. These studies aim to refine remote welfare assessment tools, which have the capacity to be applied across species in a variety of settings. IN will use computer vision and wearable sensor integration to automate detection of positive welfare indicators (pleasurable behaviors such as grooming, social proximity, and ear posture) and integrate them with feeding, activity, health, and genomic data to investigate their use as novel, sensitive indicators of onset of illness and resilience in dairy calves.

SC will improve repeatability and efficiency for radiographic and computed tomographic measures of laying hen musculoskeletal health using semi-automated image analysis techniques. TAM will characterize the variability and consistency of early lactation dairy cow behavior and productivity during a variety of heat stress conditions (measured within the barn) using body-mounted technologies (e.g., rumination collar, pedometer), the Lely A4 Robotic Milking System (e.g., milking behavior, milk yield, dead milk time, milk flow speed, fat, protein, lactose, solids non-fat, milk), video analytics (e.g., water use, brush use), and reproductive success (e.g., DIM at first service, first service conception rate) to characterize water efficient and thermotolerant phenotypes. TTU will pursue ways to use technology to measure animal affective state. VT will investigate behavioral, physiological, and data-driven indicators of welfare, health, and resilience in dairy calves and cows, with a strong emphasis on precision livestock technology and early-life management. Specifically, VT will continue to integrate automated feeding systems, accelerometers, rumination and feeding collars, computer vision, and machine-learning models to detect early signs of disease, pain, and stress (e.g., diarrhea, BRD, transportation stress, and disbudding responses). VT will characterize personality traits and individual behavioral differences—such as exploration, neophobia, social motivation, and coping styles—and link these to feeding behavior patterns, immune responses, emotional state, and lifetime performance. Using large datasets from automated milk feeders, genomic information, feeding behavior, and PLF-derived daily activity profiles, VT aims to develop predictive tools and decision-support systems to identify calves at risk and optimize management interventions.

Objective 2: To strengthen the scientific basis of applied research, on-farm and industry assessments and standards, and stakeholder engagement related to animal welfare.

Multiple stations will evaluate the impact of housing and management interventions on welfare outcomes. TAM will evaluate the effects of exercise, stocking density, head lock duration on cattle welfare. In collaboration with poultry integrators and farms, VA will assess how on-farm conditions affect behavior and welfare outcomes of broiler chickens. CA will benchmark current management practices and their impact on the welfare of pasture-raised ducks, and IN will survey US dairy farmers to understand current weaning methods applied on-farm to dairy calves, and evaluate behavior, welfare and performance of dairy calves on different weaning programs in group and individual housing systems, at different milk allowances. CA will engage veterinary and industry stakeholders to evaluate how various remote (e.g., telehealth) and in-clinic strategies impact animal health and welfare. AR will determine the preferences of broilers and turkeys for lighting and environmental enrichments.  IA and SC will also examine appropriate biologically relevant environmental enrichment. IA will continue exploring on-farm environmental enrichment for broilers and pigs, with the goal of improving space quality.  SC will evaluate how targeted environmental enrichments and aviary design features influence physical activity patterns and skeletal outcomes across key developmental stages. 

VT and CA will implement machine-learning models to inform animal welfare decisions. VT will continue to advance the scientific foundation of applied animal welfare by integrating behavioral, health, environmental, and genomic datasets into predictive, automated welfare assessment tools by refining their existing precision-technology algorithms to generate objective, scalable indicators of animal well-being. CA will evaluate how different handling methods influence acute stress responses during sex determination in farmed sturgeon. This work will incorporate machine-learning models that classify sex from ultrasound and photographic imaging, reducing the need for chemical and dewatering during examinations and lowering cumulative handling stress across multi-year production cycles.

ND and MN will work toward identifying new measures of welfare. ND will determine whether ultra-short-term heart rate variability measurement is an effective proxy of short-term heart rate variability measurement for detecting physiological stress in swine at all stages of production. MN will continue evaluating and developing new methods to detect dairy cattle lameness earlier and more efficiently, evaluate the ability of these tools and hoof lesions for use in genetic and welfare assessments, and create resources to assist the industry in addressing dairy cattle lameness.

TN and CA will continue to investigate and refine standards around behavioral data collection strategies to improve scientific rigor and translatability. TN will focus on validating sampling strategies for behavioral indicators (e.g., abnormal behaviors in dairy cattle) and improving reliability practices. CA will examine intra-rater reliability of behavioral observations of poultry.

OR will work with animal caregivers, companion animal industry partners and other stakeholders to examine new animal welfare data sets using methods that allow for translation across a variety of environments, industries and production settings, providing data needed for standardized cross-species evaluation that can help improve management practices and health and welfare outcomes in livestock, companion animals, and other human-managed animal populations. Additionally, OR will conduct research on human perception of animal behavior and welfare.

Objective 3: To investigate animal behavior across relevant species, contexts, and life stages as a means to generate new knowledge related to species-specific animal welfare needs.

Animal Behavior Across Development, Species & Breeds

For Objective 3, contributing members will focus on intrinsic factors that shape animal behavior and welfare outcomes across life stages and species. FL and WI will evaluate the development of social behavior, particularly in relation to early life social experiences, in dairy calves. CA and TN will evaluate how normal and abnormal behaviors change across life stages and how early life factors impact these across cattle breeds, similar to IN, who will assess behavioral phenotypes across live stages in dairy calves. CA aims to identify biological factors that predict behavioral and health risk factors and protective effects, with the goal of applying evidence-based strategies and knowledge to improve animal welfare outcomes. OR will evaluate the impact of health, experience, and environmental stressors on the development of social behavior and problem-solving ability in multiple domesticated species. In addition, they will evaluate the impact of intra-species interactions and human-animal interactions on attachment, chronic stress, and stress-resilience. WI will continue investigating the long-term impacts of pre-weaning social rearing on the welfare of dairy heifers.

Management & Environmental Impacts on Welfare

Another focus lies on how production systems and management impact animal welfare outcomes, arguably the most important factors that shape animal welfare. FL aims to assess the impact of social contact from birth for dairy calves, while IN will determine the benefits of cow-calf rearing for cows’ and calves’ welfare. VA will examine effects of environmental complexity (including enrichment provision) on behavior and affective states in broiler chickens. SC will identify management practices that enhance welfare outcomes across production stages in laying hens and dairy cows. TN will assess how management practices affect normal and abnormal behavior in cattle. Across multiple species, CA aims to identify environmental and management factors that predict behavioral and health risk factors and protective effects.

Individual Differences and Behavioral Indicators of Welfare

Individuality is now largely recognized as an important aspect of animal welfare status. TAM will determine temperament and personality traits in dairy calves and cows with the goal to assess whether metrics reflective of autonomic nervous system reactivity or activation would be viable phenotypes for characterizing dairy cow temperament and heat stress responses. IN will investigate development of behavioral phenotypes (personality traits) and how they may predict behavioral resilience and disease resistance in dairy calves and how individual differences in maternal behavior across parities occur. VA will determine affective states in broilers, especially focused on boredom and behavioral indicators of positive affective states.

Measurement of Progress and Results

Outputs

• Publication of results in peer-reviewed manuscripts.
• Collaborative review publications to identify knowledge gaps, avenues for discovery, and summarize current knowledge of topics related to NC1029 project objectives.
• White papers, industry reports, accepted meeting abstracts related to NC1029 project objectives.
• Educational and stakeholder engagement materials related to NC1029 project objectives.
• Publicly available databases, websites, resource repositories to facilitate sharing of relevant data and information between NC1029 members, stakeholders, and the public.
• Workshops and symposiums to foster collaboration and interaction between NC1029 members, stakeholders, and the public.

Outcomes or Projected Impacts

• Identification of behavioral and physiological indicators for assessing animal welfare in multiple species.
• Development and/or validation of technologies for automated detection of animal welfare measures, including indicators of health and behavior.
• Improved practices for conducting robust applied research to support animal welfare standard development and assessment.
• Engagement with a broad stakeholder base to improve understanding of animal welfare needs and perspectives.
• Engagement with a broad stakeholder base to provide meaningful instruction related to animal welfare.
• A deeper understanding of animal behavior across developmental (life) stages, species, and breeds
• Quantification of management and environment impacts on animal welfare outcomes to obtain species-specific insights into their welfare needs.
• Identification of individual differences in behavioral expression and associated animal welfare experiences.

Milestones

(2027):Recruit members to participate in NC1029 objectives. Hold annual meeting and conduct workshops to identify collaborative opportunities between NC1029 members.

(2028):Conduct work described in the "Methods" section of this proposal. Hold annual meeting and continue to seek opportunities for collaborative work among NC1029 members.

(2029):Conduct work described in the "Methods" section of this proposal. Report findings via methods described in the "Outputs" section of this proposal. Hold annual meeting and continue to seek opportunities for collaborative work among NC1029 members.

(2030):Conduct work described in the "Methods" section of this proposal. Report findings via methods described in the "Outputs" section of this proposal. Hold annual meeting and continue to seek opportunities for collaborative work among NC1029 members.

(2031):Complete work described in "Methods" section of this proposal. Report findings via methods described in the "Outputs" section of this proposal. Hold annual meeting and determine plan for renewal proposal (2032 - 2037).

Projected Participation

View Appendix E: Participation

Outreach Plan

Members of NC1029 will seek opportunities that align with their research, outreach, and teaching appointments to ensure the work of NC1029 is communicated to a broad stakeholder base and the public. Members will publish their work in peer-reviewed journals, white papers, industry reports, popular press publications, and publicly available websites, databases, and repositories. Work will be presented at scientific conferences, workshops, symposiums, and extension programming relevant to NC1029 objectives. Several NC1029 also actively engage and share their expertise with stakeholders and the public through committee memberships, research programs, extension programming, and educational outlets.

Organization/Governance

The Executive Committee of NC-1029 shall consist of the Chair and Secretary.

Chair: The chair of the committee is responsible for organizing the meeting agenda, conducting the meeting, preparing the final version of the annual report, and assuring that tasks and assignments are completed.

Secretary: The secretary is responsible for keeping records on decisions made at meetings (i.e., writing meeting minutes) and assisting in the preparation of the annual report by collecting and combining station reports.

The Chair is elected for a 1-year term. The Chair’s term will end once the annual report from that year’s annual meeting is submitted (within 60 days following the annual meeting). The previous Secretary will then become the Chair for 1 year. A new secretary will be elected each year by those attending the Committee meeting. If no secretary is elected at the annual meeting, a nomination and election process should be held virtually. A new secretary should be selected prior to the submission of the annual report.

Members: Committee membership requires active participation and information exchange (including the submission of a station report) at the annual meetings. In addition to carrying out the agreed information exchange, project members are responsible for contributing to the ongoing progress of any committee activity, and communicating their accomplishments to the committee's members and their respective employing institutions. Regular attendance is vital for a committee to be successful. Therefore, members that do not actively participate in committee activities and requirements (e.g., attending meetings in person or virtually, contributing to yearly station reports for their institution, participating in collaborative opportunities as they relate to the NC1029 objectives) for three years will be removed from the committee.

Literature Cited

1. Adcock, S. J. J., B. C. Downey, C. Owens, and C. B. Tucker. 2023. Behavioral changes in the first 3 weeks after disbudding in dairy calves. Dairy Sci. 106:6365–6374. doi:10.3168/jds.2023-23237.
2. Anderson, M. G., A. M. Johnson, C. Harrison, J. Jones, and A. Ali. 2024. Influence of perch provision during rearing on activity and musculoskeletal health of pullets. PLoS ONE 19(7):e0307114. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0307114.
3. Anderson, N., L. Underwood, and C. Byrd. 2025. Student reported learning of swine and dairy welfare concepts following a virtual reality livestock farm experience. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 1–13. doi:10.1080/10888705.2024.2389643.
4. Arias-Esquivel, A. M., A. C. C. M. Vasco, J. Lance, L. K. Warren, L. A. Rodriguez-Campos, M. C. Lee, C. N. Rodriguez, and C. L. Wickens. 2024. Investigating the gastrointestinal physiology of mature horses with and without a history of cribbing behavior in response to feeding a digestive support supplement. Equine Vet. Sci. 104964. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2023.104964.
5. Bashir, R., T. L. Duarte, X. Yang, J. A. Gross, and R. J. McGorrin. 2025. Comparative analysis of slaughter methods and packaging on flavor quality and shelf life of farm-raised rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss). (Under review).
6. Beausoleil, N., J. C. Swanson, D. McKeegan, and C. Croney. 2023. Application of the Five Domains Model to food chain management of animal welfare: opportunities and constraints. Anim. Sci. 4:1042733. doi:10.3389/fanim.2023.1042733.
7. Bentosela, M., C. Cavalli, M. V. Dzik, M. Caliva, and M. A. R. Udell. 2024. Effects of a brief separation from the owner while in the home environment: Comparison of fearful and control dogs. Anthrozoös 37:959–975. doi:10.1080/08927936.2024.2389643.
8. Boles, S. E., I. P. Neylan, L. Rogers-Bennett, and J. A. Gross. 2022. Evaluation of gonad reproductive condition using non-invasive ultrasonography in red abalone (Haliotis rufescens). Mar. Sci. 9:784481. doi:10.3389/fmars.2022.784481.
9. Boles, S. E., L. Rogers-Bennett, W. K. Bragg, J. Bredvik-Curran, S. Graham, and J. A. Gross. 2023. Determination of reproductive state using non-lethal ultrasonography in black and white abalone. Mar. Sci. 10:1134844. doi:10.3389/fmars.2023.1134844.
10. Boone, G., M. Bain, J. Cutler, and C. Moody. 2023. Evaluating video telemedicine for providing virtual health care for cats via mock spay recheck examinations. Anim. Behav. Sci. 106061. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2023.106061.
11. Boone, G., D. Pang, H. Shih, and C. Moody. 2025. Incorporating video telehealth for improving at-home management of chronic health conditions in cats: a focus on chronic mobility problems. Vet. Sci. 1510006. doi:10.3389/fvets.2025.1510006.
12. Broadus, L. J., B. Lee, and M. M. Makagon. 2022. The impacts of female access during rearing on the reproductive behavior and physiology of Pekin drakes, and flock fertility. Animals 12:2979. doi:10.3390/ani12212979.
13. Bučková, K., A. M. Newgard, L. J. Tomko, K. M. Arnold, and A. K. Johnson. 2025. Effects of piglet enrichment on sow skin lesions and behavior before and after tail-docking and castration. Ethol. 1607722. doi:10.3389/fetho.2025.1607722.
14. Byrd, C. J., and J. M. Young. 2023. Evaluating the effect of a mild cycling heating period on leukocyte coping capacity in growing pigs. Anim. Sci. 4:1148218. doi:10.3389/fanim.2023.1148218.
15. Cantor, M. C., and J. H. C. Costa. 2022. Daily behavioral measures recorded by precision technology devices may indicate bovine respiratory disease status in preweaned dairy calves. Dairy Sci. 105:6070–6082. doi:10.3168/jds.2021-20798.
16. Cantor, M. C., A. A. Welk, K. C. Creutzinger, M. M. Woodrum Setser, J. H. C. Costa, and D. L. Renaud. 2024. The development and validation of a milk feeding behavior alert from automated feeder data to classify calves at risk for a diarrhea bout: A diagnostic accuracy study. Dairy Sci. 107:3140–3156. doi:10.3168/jds.2023-23635.
17. Carroll, A. D., A. Cisneros, H. Porter, C. Moody, and A. C. Stellato. 2022. Dog owner perceptions of veterinary handling techniques. Animals 12:1387. doi:10.3390/ani12111387.
18. Casella, E., M. C. Cantor, M. M. W. Setser, S. Silvestri, and J. H. C. Costa. 2023. A machine learning and optimization framework for the early diagnosis of bovine respiratory disease. IEEE Access 11:71164–71179. doi:10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3291348.
19. Clark, A. J., C. Harrison, A. J. Bragg, G. M. House, A. B. Stephan, M. Arguelles-Ramos, and A. Ali. 2024. Effect of interrupting the daily scotophase period on laying hen performance, bone health, behavior, and welfare; Part I: Bone health. Poultry 3:364–382. doi:10.3390/poultry3040028.
20. Clark, A. J., A. J. Bragg, A. H. Alqhtani, M. Arguelles-Ramos, and A. Ali. 2025. The influence of different light day distribution in Hy-Line W36 laying hens on egg production and egg quality. Animals 15:838. doi:10.3390/ani15060838.
21. Clein, D. A., E. E. Lindner, J. Bonney-King, and E. K. Miller-Cushon. 2024. Long-term effects of pre-weaning social housing on response to a social and housing transition in pregnant heifers. Dairy Sci. 107:11524–11535. doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25179.
22. Coon, R. E., and C. B. Tucker. 2023. Measuring motivation for forage in feedlot cattle fed a high-concentrate diet using a short-term thwarting test. Anim. Behav. Sci. 265:105950. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105950.
23. Coon, R. E., and C. B. Tucker. 2024a. Cattle are more motivated for a high-concentrate diet than Sudan grass hay, despite low reticulorumen pH. Anim. Sci. 102:skae049. doi:10.1093/jas/skae049.
24. Coon, R. E., and C. B. Tucker. 2024b. Measuring motivation for alfalfa hay in feedlot cattle using voluntary interaction with an aversive stimulus. Anim. Behav. Sci. 271:106165. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106165.
25. Couture, M., A. C. Stellato, C. Moody, and L. Niel. 2022. Owner perspectives of cat handling techniques used in the veterinary clinic. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 25:2039144. doi:10.1080/10888705.2022.2039144.
26. Creamer, M., and K. Horback. 2024. Consistent individual differences in behavior among beef cattle in handling contexts and social-feed preference testing. Anim. Behav. Sci. 106315. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106315.
27. Croney, C., M. A. R. Udell, M. Delgado, K. J. Ekenstedt, and A. K. Shoveller. 2023. CATastrophic myths part 1: Common misconceptions about the social behavior of domestic cats and implications for their health, welfare, and management. J. 106028. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2023.106028.
28. Davis, L., K. Deb, J. Siegford, and A. B. A. Ali. 2022. Decision tree analysis to evaluate risks associated with lameness on dairy farms with automated milking systems. Anim. Sci. 3:999261. doi:10.3389/fanim.2022.999261.
29. Dong, Y., G. S. Fraley, J. M. Siegford, F. Zhu, and M. A. Erasmus. 2023. Comparing different environmental enrichments for improving the welfare and walking ability of male turkeys. PLoS ONE 18:e0285347. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0285347.
30. Downey, B. C., and C. B. Tucker. 2023. Providing long hay in a novel pipe feeder or a bucket reduces abnormal oral behaviors in milk-fed dairy calves. Dairy Sci. 106:1968–1985. doi:10.3168/jds.2022-22413.
31. Downey, B. C., M. B. Jensen, and C. B. Tucker. 2022. Hay provision affects 24-h performance of normal and abnormal oral behaviors in individually housed dairy calves. Dairy Sci. 105:4434–4448. doi:10.3168/jds.2021-21439.
32. Doyle, S. B., and E. K. Miller-Cushon. 2023. Influences of human contact following milk-feeding on non-nutritive oral behavior and rest of individual and pair-housed dairy calves during weaning. JDS Commun. 4:46–50. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2022-0264.
33. Drwencke, A. M., S. J. J. Adcock, and C. B. Tucker. 2023. Wound healing and pain sensitivity following caustic paste disbudding in dairy calves. Dairy Sci. 106:6375–6387. doi:10.3168/jds.2023-23238.
34. Drwencke, A. M., S. J. J. Adcock, and C. B. Tucker. 2025a. Wound characteristics after disbudding: Part I—Effects of caustic paste dose and presence of hair. Dairy Sci. 108:11463–11477. doi:10.3168/jds.2025-26688.
35. Drwencke, A. M., S. J. J. Adcock, and C. B. Tucker. 2025b. Wound characteristics after disbudding: Part II—Comparing cautery and caustic paste methods. Dairy Sci. 108:11479–11492. doi:10.3168/jds.2025-26687.
36. Fikes, K. K., J. L. Leatherwood, J. A. Coverdale, J. M. Campbell, T. H. Welsh Jr., C. J. Hartz, M. Goehring, A. A. Millican, A. N. Bradbery, and T. A. Wickersham. 2021. Effect of bioactive proteins on gait kinematics and systemic inflammatory markers in mature horses. Anim. Sci. 5(1):txab017. doi:10.1093/tas/txab017.
37. Fortney, D., E. Sundman, N. Gabler, S. Millman, and A. Johnson. 2024a. Does environmental feeder enrichment for weaned pigs drive feeder usage and improve final body weight? Anim. Sci. 102(3):435–436. doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.493.
38. Fortney, D., E. Sundman, N. Gabler, S. Millman, and A. Johnson. 2024b. Effect of environmental enrichment on pig average daily feed intake and average daily gain in the early nursery phase. Anim. Sci. 102(3):437–438. doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.495.
39. Fu, Y., J. Hu, M. A. Erasmus, H. Zhang, T. A. Johnson, and H. Cheng. 2023. Cecal microbiota transplantation: Unique influence of cecal microbiota from divergently selected inbred donor lines on cecal microbial profile, serotonergic activity, and aggressive behavior of recipient chickens. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 14:66. doi:10.1186/s40104-023-00866-9.
40. Gingerich, K. N., E. E. Lindner, S. Kalman, and E. K. Miller-Cushon. 2023. Social contact from birth influences personality traits of group-housed dairy calves. JDS Commun. 4:484–488. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2023-0383.
41. Gingerich, K. N., K. C. Burke, F. P. Maunsell, and E. K. Miller-Cushon. 2025. Individual and group level health factors influence social networks of dairy calves. Rep. 15:7720. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-17720-3.
42. Goeller, H. B., B. C. Downey, and C. B. Tucker. 2023. Limit feeding TMR exacerbates intersucking in year-old dairy heifers. Dairy Sci. 106:9494–9506. doi:10.3168/jds.2022-23126.
43. Grimes, M., E. Jiral, A. LeBlanc, J. Rocha, and G. S. Archer. 2025. Comparison of application rate of three commercial litter amendment products on litter pH, ammonia volatilization, and broiler paw scores during the brooding period. Appl. Poult. Res. 34:100565. doi:10.1016/j.japr.2025.100565.
44. Gross, J. A., and C. Yang. 2024. Impacts of dietary protein source on the physiological health of white sturgeon. California Department of Food and Agriculture Research Report.
45. Gross, J. A., J. R. Bowman, D. M. Imai, T. S. Wong, T. L. Duarte, S. E. Boles, R. J. McGorrin, and X. Yang. 2024. Evaluation of non-penetrative captive bolt stunning as a method of slaughter for white sturgeon (Acipenser transmontanus). Anim. Sci. 5:1405554. doi:10.3389/fanim.2024.1405554.
46. Han, J., J. Siegford, G. de los Campos, R. J. Tempelman, C. Gondro, and J. P. Steibel. 2022. Analysis of social interactions in group-housed animals using dyadic linear models. Anim. Behav. Sci. 256:105747. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105747.
47. Han, J., J. Siegford, D. Colbry, R. Lesiyon, A. Bosgraaf, C. Chen, T. Norton, and J. P. Steibel. 2023. Evaluation of computer vision for detecting agonistic behavior of pigs in a single-space feeding stall through blocked cross-validation strategies. Electron. Agric. 204:107520. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2022.107520.
48. Hare, L., S. Marsilio, I. Halperin, A. C. Stellato, and C. Moody. 2025. Owner presence versus absence during cat veterinary examinations: cat responses and owner attitudes. Anim. Behav. Sci. 292:106792. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106792.
49. Holquinn, J. A., H. L. Sutherland, E. R. Sculley, M. A. Erasmus, L. F. Brito, and A. C. Murillo. 2024. How mites influence cage-free egg production in the United States, mite management strategies, and the mitigating role of genomic selection. Front. 14:24–31. doi:10.1093/af/vfae023.
50. Hopkins, K., J. Swanson, and M. McKendree. 2022. Assessing best management practice adoption by pasture-based beef producers: The Whole Herd Beef Risk Index. Anim. Sci. 38:200–209. doi:10.15232/aas.2021-02222.
51. Horback, K., and T. D. Parsons. 2022. Judgement bias of group housed gestating sows predicted by behavioral traits, but not physical measures of welfare. PLoS ONE 17:e0264258. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0264258.
52. Inadagbo, O., G. Makowski, A. A. Ahmed, and C. Daigle. 2024. On developing a machine learning-based approach for the automatic characterization of behavioral phenotypes for dairy cows relevant to thermotolerance. AgriEngineering 6:2656–2677. doi:10.3390/agriengineering6030155.
53. Irvine, K., C. L. Wickens, M. Nelson, R. Prasad, and L. N. R. Patterson. 2025. 4-H youth comprehension, perceptions, and selection of tack and its implications for equine welfare. Equine Vet. Sci. 148:105499. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105499.
54. Jackson, A., D. Landers, D. Bourassa, J. Purswell, and B. Baker-Cook. 2025a. Characterizing the development of normal behaviors in broiler chicks during early life. Sci. 104:105436. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2025.105436.
55. Jackson, A., D. Landers, J. Purswell, and B. Baker-Cook. 2025b. Research note: Assessing disturbance and its impact on behavior in the early-life of broiler chicks. Sci. 104:105355. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2025.105355.
56. Jacobs, L., R. A. Blatchford, I. C. de Jong, M. A. Erasmus, M. Levengood, R. C. Newberry, P. Regmi, A. B. Riber, and S. L. Weimer. 2023. Enhancing their quality of life: environmental enrichment for poultry. Sci. 102:102233. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2022.102233.
57. Jones, C. T., A. N. Pullin, R. A. Blatchford, M. M. Makagon, and K. Horback. 2023. Effects of rearing with vertical structures on the ontogeny of depth perception in laying hens. Anim. Behav. Sci. 259:105837. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2023.105837.
58. Juge, A. E., N. J. Hall, J. T. Richeson, R. F. Cooke, and C. L. Daigle. 2024. Dogs’ ability to detect an inflammatory immune response in cattle via olfaction. Vet. Sci. 11:1393289. doi:10.3389/fvets.2024.1393289.
59. Kasakamu, M. L., J. M. Young, R. S. Samuel, S. A. Wagner, and C. J. Byrd. 2024. The effect of ramped nursery housing on pig behavior during loading and unloading at marketing. Anim. Behav. Sci. 279:106397. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106397.
60. Kranz, V., K. Horback, T. Parsons, and M. Pierdon. 2022. Impact of familiarity and method of introduction on behavior of sows in a large dynamic group. Anim. Behav. Sci. 250:105624. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2022.105624.
61. Lee, S., G. Boone, A. Bidgoli, J. Di Bernardo, and C. Moody. 2024. US cat caregivers’ attitudes towards veterinary video telemedicine. Feline Med. Surg. 26:1098612X241249623. doi:10.1177/1098612X241249623.
62. Lindner, E. E., J. Bonney-King, C. M. Burner, P. D. Krawczel, J. J. Bromfield, J. H. J. Bittar, T. Martins, and E. K. Miller-Cushon. 2025. Long-term effects of preweaning social housing on growth and reproductive development of dairy heifers. Dairy Sci. 108:10023–10036. doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25036.
63. Lovatti, J. V. R., K. A. Dijkinga, J. F. Aires, L. F. C. Garrido, J. H. C. Costa, and R. R. Daros. 2024. Validation and interdevice reliability of a behavior monitoring collar to measure rumination, feeding activity, and idle time of lactating dairy cows. JDS Commun. 5:602–607. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2023-0467.
64. Lu, Q., J. Van Os, and M. M. Makagon. 2025. Examining time sampling schemes for quantifying pullet and hen behavior. Anim. Behav. Sci. 285:106572. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106572.
65. Makagon, M. M., and A. B. Riber. 2022. Setting research-driven duck-welfare standards: a systematic review of Pekin duck welfare research. Sci. 101:101614. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2021.101614.
66. Martinez, R. E., J. L. Leatherwood, C. E. Arnold, K. G. Glass, K. W. Walker, H. C. Valigura, S. A. Norton, and S. H. White-Springer. 2021. Responses to an intra-articular lipopolysaccharide challenge following dietary supplementation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product in young horses. Anim. Sci. 99:skab272. doi:10.1093/jas/skab272.
67. McMillian, Z., J. Moyle, G. Martin, A. Magnaterra, A. Snyder, and S. Weimer. 2025. Effects of circulation fans on broiler welfare indicators in commercial houses during cold seasons. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 28:2464560. doi:10.1080/10888705.2025.2464560.
68. Michalski, E., M. M. Woodrum Setser, G. Mazon, H. W. Neave, and J. H. C. Costa. 2023. Personality of individually housed dairy-beef crossbred calves is related to performance and behavior. Anim. Sci. 3:1097503. doi:10.3389/fanim.2022.1097503.
69. Morrison, J. L., C. B. Winder, C. Medrano-Galarza, P. Denis, D. Haley, S. J. LeBlanc, J. Costa, M. Steele, and D. L. Renaud. 2022. Case-control study of behavior data from automated milk feeders in healthy or diseased dairy calves. JDS Commun. 3:201–206. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2021-0153.
70. Morrow, C. R., B. C. Downey, and C. B. Tucker. 2023. Response to novel feed in dairy calves is affected by prior hay provision and presentation method. PLoS ONE 18:e0284889. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0284889.
71. Much, M. L., J. L. Leatherwood, R. E. Martinez, B. L. Silvers, C. F. Basta, L. F. Gray, and A. N. Bradbery. 2021. Effects of an oral joint supplement on gait kinematics and biomarkers of cartilage metabolism and inflammation in mature riding horses. Anim. Sci. 4:txaa150. doi:10.1093/tas/txaa150.
72. Mullim, H., R. Hernandez, R. Vanderhout, X. Bai, O. Willems, P. Regmi, M. Erasmus, and L. Brito. 2024. Genetic background of walking ability and its relationship with leg defects, mortality, and performance traits in turkeys (Meleagris gallopavo). Sci. 103779. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2024.103779.
73. Murillo, A. C., A. Abdoli, R. A. Blatchford, E. J. Keogh, and A. C. Gerry. 2024. Low levels of chicken body louse (Mecanthus stramineus) infestations affect chicken welfare in a cage-free housing system. Parasites Vectors 17:221. doi:10.1186/s13071-024-06121-3.
74. Nakonechny, L., A. Cisneros, C. Moody, and A. Stellato. 2025. Handling techniques and risk factors reported by veterinary professionals during dog examinations: a cross-sectional survey across Canada and the US. Vet. Sci. 1634970. doi:10.3389/fvets.2025.1634970.
75. Neave, H. W., J. L. Rault, E. H. Jensen, and M. B. Jensen. 2024. Oxytocin response of dairy cows to nursing and permanent separation from their calves, and the influence of the cow-calf bond. Anim. Behav. Sci. 281:106429. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106429.
76. Neave, H. W., G. Zobel, S. McCoard, and J. H. C. Costa. 2025. Improving the welfare of ruminants around weaning: transitioning from milk to a solid diet. Clin. Food Anim. Pract. 41:345–358. doi:10.1016/j.cvfa.2024.11.004.
77. Neave, H. W. 2025. Symposium review: Measuring minds: Understanding the mental states of dairy cattle in different management conditions. JDS Commun. 6:479–483. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2024-0501.
78. O’Malley, C. I., J. P. Steibel, R. O. Bates, C. W. Ernst, and J. M. Siegford. 2021. Time budgets of group-housed pigs in relation to social aggression and production. Anim. Sci. 99:skab110. doi:10.1093/jas/skab110.
79. O’Malley, C. I., J. P. Steibel, R. O. Bates, C. E. Ernst, and J. M. Siegford. 2022. The social life of pigs: can understanding of affiliative behavior help reduce aggression in groups? Animals 12:206. doi:10.3390/ani12020206.
80. Olatinwo, O. A., J. M. Young, T. Shevtsova, A. Voronov, and C. J. Byrd. 2025a. Do topical gels containing oleic acid and fish oil reduce the piglet pain response following surgical castration? Poster presented at the 58th Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology, Utrecht, Netherlands.
81. Olatinwo, O. A., J. M. Young, T. Shevtsova, A. Voronov, and C. J. Byrd. 2025b. Assessing the effect of topical gels containing oleic acid and fish oil on wound healing in piglets following surgical castration. Anim. Sci. 103(Suppl. 3):3–4. doi:10.1093/jas/skaf300.004.
82. Oyeniran, V., A. Forga, A. Atencio, J. Palmer, W. Thomas, M. Arango, S. Kang, R. Whittle, D. Graham, and S. Weimer. 2025. Aquabeads® supplementation stimulates activity and improves the 10-day growth performance of turkey poult hens. Appl. Poult. Res. 100626. doi:10.1016/j.japr.2025.100626.
83. Peiter, M., K. L. Caixeta, and M. Endres. 2023. Association between change in body weight during early lactation and milk production in automatic milking system herds. JDS Commun. 4:369–372. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2022-0345.
84. Perretti, A., V. J. Oyeniran, J. M. Cherry, R. H. Whittle, Z. Grider, A. H. Nelson, S. W. Kang, G. F. Erf, and S. L. Weimer. 2025. Effects of light wavelength on broiler performance, blood cell profiles, stress levels, and tibiotarsi morphology. Animals 15:2372. doi:10.3390/ani15162372.
85. Perttu, R. K., B. A. Ventura, A. K. Rendahl, and M. I. Endres. 2021. Public views of dairy calf welfare and dairy consumption habits of American youth and adults. Vet. Sci. 8:693173. doi:10.3389/fvets.2021.693173.
86. Perttu, R. K., M. Peiter, T. Bresolin, J. R. R. Dórea, and M. I. Endres. 2023. Feeding behaviors collected from automated milk feeders were associated with disease in group-housed dairy calves in the Upper Midwest United States. Dairy Sci. 106:1206–1217. doi:10.3168/jds.2022-22043.
87. Phillips, H. N., K. T. Sharpe, M. I. Endres, and B. J. Heins. 2022. Effects of oral white willow bark (Salix alba) and intravenous flunixin meglumine on prostaglandin E2 in healthy dairy calves. JDS Commun. 3:49–54. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2021-0178.
88. Proudfoot, K., T. Ede, C. Ryan, and H. W. Neave. 2025. Invited review: Cognition of dairy cattle: Implications for animal welfare and dairy science. JDS Commun. (In press). doi:10.3168/jdsc.2024-0520.
89. Puitiza, A., H. G. Molinaro, F. Barrios, K. R. Vitale, S. Darling, D. H. Frank, and M. A. R. Udell. 2025. Contextual cues influence human perception of cat emotion. Anthrozoös 38:2578074. doi:10.1080/08927936.2025.2578074.
90. Rasmussen, S. N., K. E. Wurtz, M. Erasmus, and A. B. Riber. 2024. Animal-based methods for the assessment of broiler chicken welfare in organic and conventional production systems. Anim. Behav. Sci. 106300. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106300.
91. Rentsch, A. K., A. Harlander, J. Siegford, I. Vitienes, B. Willie, and T. M. Widowski. 2023a. Rearing laying hens: the effect of aviary design and genetic strain on pullet exercise and perching behavior. Anim. Sci. 4:1176702. doi:10.3389/fanim.2023.1176702.
92. Rentsch, A. K., E. Ross, A. Harlander, L. Niel, J. Siegford, and T. M. Widowski. 2023b. The development of laying hen locomotion in 3D space is affected by early environmental complexity and genetic strain. Rep. 13:10084. doi:10.1038/s41598-023-35956-1.
93. Rodriguez, B. M., S. Chaves-Araya, J. M. Estrada-McDermott, A. Saborio-Montero, C. L. Wickens, and A. M. Arias-Esquivel. 2025. Behavior and physiological responses of horses at the Costa Rican National Horse Parade: Developing welfare indicators for real-time assessment. Equine Vet. Sci. 148:105466. doi:10.1016/j.jevs.2024.105466.
94. Schiller, K., and K. Horback. 2024a. Varying degrees of human-animal interaction elicit weak evidence of a temporally stable behavioral trait in rangeland breeding ewes. Anim. Behav. Sci. 275:106269. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106269.
95. Schiller, K., and K. Horback. 2024b. Behavioral responses during and after a postpartum human-animal interaction in rangeland breeding ewes. Anim. Behav. Sci. 280:106405. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106405.
96. Schiller, K., J. Monk, C. Lee, and K. Horback. 2023. Associations between immune competence phenotype and stress response in sheep. Anim. Sci. 4:1160202. doi:10.3389/fanim.2023.1160202.
97. Schwanke, A., K. Dancy, H. W. Neave, G. Penner, R. Bergeron, and T. DeVries. 2024. Effect of dairy cow personality traits and concentrate allowance on their response to training and adaptation to an automated milking system. Dairy Sci. 107:11446–11462. doi:10.3168/jds.2023-24498.
98. Woodrum Setser, M. M., H. W. Neave, and J. H. C. Costa. 2023. The history, implementation, and application of personality tests in livestock animals and their links to performance. Anim. Behav. Sci. 268:106081. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2023.106081.
99. Woodrum Setser, M. M., H. W. Neave, and J. H. C. Costa. 2024. Are you ready for a challenge? Personality traits influence dairy calves’ responses to disease, pain, and nutritional challenges. Dairy Sci. 107:9821–9838. doi:10.3168/jds.2023-24514.
100. Shevtsova, T., R. D. Maalihan, Z. Demchuk, C. J. Byrd, E. B. Caldona, and A. Voronov. 2025. Rheological study of biobased structured emulsions for pharmaceutical and cosmetic applications. Polymer 339:129107. doi:10.1016/j.polymer.2025.129107.
101. Silvers, B. L., J. L. Leatherwood, C. E. Arnold, B. D. Nielsen, C. J. Huseman, B. J. Dominguez, K. G. Glass, R. E. Martinez, M. L. Much, and A. N. Bradbery. 2021. Effects of aquatic conditioning on cartilage and joint metabolism in young horses. Anim. Sci. 98:skab198. doi:10.1093/jas/skab198.
102. Snyder, A. M., S. P. Riley, C. I. Robison, D. M. Karcher, C. L. Wickware, T. A. Johnson, and S. L. Weimer. 2022. Behavior and immune response of conventional and slow-growing broilers to Salmonella Typhimurium. Physiol. 13:890848. doi:10.3389/fphys.2022.890848.
103. Sommer, D. M., J. M. Young, X. Sun, G. Lopez-Martinez, and C. J. Byrd. 2023. Are infrared thermography, feeding behavior, and heart rate variability measures capable of characterizing group-housed sow social hierarchies? Anim. Sci. skad143. doi:10.1093/jas/skad143.
104. Sommer, D. M., J. M. Young, X. Sun, G. Lopez-Martinez, and C. J. Byrd. 2024. The effect of social hierarchy on short-term group-housed sow gestation and reproductive performance. Sci. 290:105591. doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2024.105591.
105. Stahl, A., S. Barnard, D. Diana, M. A. R. Udell, and C. Croney. 2024. Attachment style and social fear in dogs from commercial breeding kennels. Anim. Behav. Sci. 273:106238. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106238.
106. Sundman, E. R., N. K. Gabler, S. T. Millman, K. J. Stalder, L. A. Karriker, and A. K. Johnson. 2022. The use of attractants to stimulate neonatal piglet interest in rope enrichment. Animals 12:211. doi:10.3390/ani12020211.
107. Swartz, D., E. Shepley, and G. Cramer. 2025a. Evaluating cow identification reliability of a camera-based locomotion and body condition scoring system in dairy cows. JDS Commun. doi:10.3168/jdsc.2024-0659.
108. Swartz, D., E. Shepley, L. S. Caixeta, and G. Cramer. 2025b. A descriptive analysis of inter- and intraobserver agreement of body condition scoring methods in dairy cattle. Dairy Sci. 108:9712–9727. doi:10.3168/jds.2025-26257.
109. Tananaeva, A., and M. A. R. Udell. 2024. Measuring stress in pet dogs: Preliminary results and future directions. Presented at Canine Science Conference, Seattle, WA.
110. Trice, M. 2023. Attachment style and stress resilience of bottle-fed versus nursing lambs in the presence of a human caretaker. Thesis, Oregon State University.
111. Tucker, C. B., S. J. J. Adcock, J. M. C. Van Os, C. Moody, and B. C. Downey. 2025a. Observer reliability in animal behavior research: A workshop. Accepted abstract. Workshop at the 58^th Congress of the International Society for Applied Ethology, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
112. Tucker, C. B., S. J. J. Adcock, J. M. C. Van Os, C. Moody, and B. C. Downey. 2025b. Observer reliability in animal behavior research: A workshop. Accepted abstract. Workshop at North American Regional International Society for Applied Ethology, Guelph, Ontario, Canada.
113. Udell, M. A. R., M. Delgado, K. J. Ekenstedt, A. K. Shoveller, and C. C. Croney. 2023. CATastrophic myths part 2: Common misconceptions about the environmental, nutritional, and genetic management of domestic cats and their welfare implications. J. 106029. doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2023.106029.
114. Udell, M. A. R. 2021. Importance of child-animal bonds and parallels in attachment behavior across species. Invited podcast speaker for Supporting Child Caregivers Podcast.
115. Udell, M. A. R. 2022a. The science behind human-animal bonds. Invited presentation for ZOHU webinar series, CDC One Health.
116. Udell, M. A. R. 2022b. Challenging stereotypes improves understanding of canine behavioral genetics. Behav. 50:441–442. doi:10.3758/s13420-022-00543-3.
117. Udell, M. A. R. 2024. It’s like herding cats! Why our beliefs about the behavior & cognition of other species matter. Presented at Canine Science Symposium, San Francisco, CA.
118. Ufer, D., D. Ortega, C. Wolf, M. McKendree, and J. Swanson. 2022. Getting past the gatekeeper: Key motivations of dairy farmer intent to adopt animal welfare-improving biotechnology. Food Policy doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2022.102358.
119. Underwood, L., C. Byrd, and N. Anderson. 2025. Student perceptions of using a virtual reality farm model as a learning tool. NACTA J. doi:10.56103/nactaj.v69i1.238.
120. Valigura, H. C., J. L. Leatherwood, R. E. Martinez, S. A. Norton, and S. H. White-Springer. 2021. Dietary supplementation of a Saccharomyces cerevisiae fermentation product attenuates exercise-induced stress markers in young horses. Anim. Sci. 99:skab199. doi:10.1093/jas/skab199.
121. Weimer, S. L., S. Zuelly, M. Davis, D. M. Karcher, and M. A. Erasmus. 2022. Differences in carcass composition and meat quality of conventional and slow-growing broiler chickens raised at 2 stocking densities. Sci. 101:101833. doi:10.1016/j.psj.2022.101833.
122. Welk, A., H. W. Neave, and M. B. Jensen. 2024. Invited review: The effect of weaning practices on dairy calf performance, behavior, and health—A systematic review. Dairy Sci. 107:5237–5258. doi:10.3168/jds.2023-24356.
123. Welk, A., M. C. Cantor, H. W. Neave, J. H. C. Costa, J. L. Morrison, M. B. Jensen, C. B. Winder, and D. L. Renaud. 2025. Effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs on neonatal calf diarrhea when administered at disease alert generated by automated milk feeders. Dairy Sci. 108:1842–1854. doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25897.
124. Whalin, L., K. Barth, H. W. Neave, J. Johnsen, and others. 2025. Invited review: Future directions for cow-calf contact research and sustainable on-farm application. Dairy Sci. 108:6550–6564. doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25987.
125. Wood, B. N., C. R. Rufener, M. M. Makagon, and R. A. Blatchford. 2021. The utility of scatter feeding as enrichment: Do broiler chickens engage with scatter-fed items? Animals 11:123. doi:10.3390/ani11010123.
126. Woodrum Setser, M. M., H. W. Neave, and J. H. C. Costa. 2024. Are you ready for a challenge? Personality traits influence dairy calves’ responses to disease, pain, and nutritional challenges. Dairy Sci. 107:9821–9838. doi:10.3168/jds.2023-24514.
127. Woods, J. M., and S. J. J. Adcock. 2025a. Healing progression of tail docking and ear tag wounds in lambs. Rep. 15:3061. doi:10.1038/s41598-025-86204-7.
128. Woods, J. M., and S. J. J. Adcock. 2025b. The maternal-offspring relationship in tailed and docked ewes and their lambs. Anim. Behav. Sci. 292:106775. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106775.
129. Woods, J. M., and S. J. J. Adcock. 2025c. Sexual attractivity and receptivity in tailed and docked ewes. Anim. Behav. Sci. 291:106733. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106733.

Attachments

Land Grant Participating States/Institutions

AL, AR, CA, IA, MI, MS, ND, NE, OR, VA

Non Land Grant Participating States/Institutions