Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T09:12:45.346Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Introduction: Darwinian selection, selective breeding and the welfare of animals

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

JK Kirkwood*
Affiliation:
Universities Federation for Animal Welfare, The Old School, Brewhouse Hill, Wheathampstead, Hertfordshire AL4 8AN, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The 150th anniversary of the publication of The Origin of Species… is a good time to consider how selection can affect welfare — the quality of life. Darwin (1859) quoted Youatt's description of selective breeding: “…the magician's wand, by means of which he may summon into life whatever form and mould he pleases”. Evolution has fairly recently included us humans in its toolbox, alongside its older instruments, such as climate and disease, as significant agents of selection. We have taken to this work vigorously and have summoned into life an extraordinary array of creatures. It is only much more recently, with the development of interest in animal welfare science, that the welfare consequences of this have begun to be critically reviewed. There are two ways that selection can affect welfare: (i) by resulting in changes that make aversive feelings more likely, eg by predisposing to disease or by altering behaviour such as to increase risk of disease or injury, and (ii) by altering sensitivity of the affect systems such that animals feel, for example, more (or less) pain or fear in response to a stimulus than their ancestors would have. Comparing natural and human selection — that is, the simultaneous scrutiny of all aspects of biology as opposed to our selection for one or two features that appeal to us — Darwin (1859) wrote: “Can we wonder, then, that nature's productions should be far ‘truer’ in character than man's productions; that they should be infinitely better adapted to the most complex conditions of life, and should plainly bear the stamp of far higher workmanship”. The aims of this meeting were to discuss how selection can affect welfare and how we can improve our workmanship in the interests of animal welfare.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2010 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Baba, E and Fukata, T 1981 Incidence of otitis externa in dogs and cats in Japan. Veterinary Record 108: 393395Google ScholarPubMed
CAWC 2006 Breeding and Welfare in Companion Animals: The Companion Animal Welfare Council's Report on Welfare Aspects of Modifications, Through Selective Breeding or Biotechnological Methods, to the Form, Function, or Behaviour of Companion Animals. Available from the Companion Animal Welfare Council. www.cawc.org.ukGoogle Scholar
CIDD 2004 Fold Dermatitis. Canine Inherited Disorders Database. Available at: http://www.upei.ca/cidd/Diseases/dermatology/fold%20dermatitis.htmGoogle Scholar
Conington, J, Collins, J and Dwyer, C 2010 Breeding for easier managed sheep. Animal Welfare 19: S83S92Google Scholar
Darwin, C 1859 On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. John Murray: London, UKCrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAWC 1998 Report on the Welfare of Broiler Breeders. Farm Animal Welfare Council: London, UK. Available at www.fawc.org.ukGoogle Scholar
FAWC 2004 FAWC Report on the Welfare Implications of Animal Breeding and Breeding Technologies in Commercial Agriculture. Farm Animal Welfare Council: London, UK. Available at www.fawc.org.ukGoogle Scholar
Fraser, D 2008 Understanding Animal Welfare. Wiley Blackwell: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar
Kirkwood, JK 2004 The importance of animal welfare. In: Perry, GC (ed) The Welfare of the Laying Hen Proceedings of the World Poultry Science Association Symposium on the Welfare of the Laying Hen pp 17 July 2003, Bristol, UK. CAB International: Wallingford, UKGoogle Scholar
Kirkwood, JK, Sainsbury, AW and Bennett, PM 1994 The welfare of free-living wild animals: method of assessment. Animal Welfare 3: 257273Google Scholar
Lewis, TK, Woolliams, JA and Blott, SC 2010 Optimisation of breeding strategies to reduce the prevalence of inherited disease in pedigree dogs. Animal Welfare 19: S99S105Google Scholar
McGreevy, PD 2007 Breeding for quality of life. Animal Welfare 16: S125S128Google Scholar
Paster, ER, LaFond, E, Biery, DN, Iriye, A, Gregor, TP, Shofer, FS and Smith, GK 2005 Estimates of prevalence of hip dysplasia in Golden Retrievers and Rottweilers and the influence of bias on published prevalence figures. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 226: 387392CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, CJC 2009 A review of mulesing and other methods to control flystrike. Animal Welfare 18: 113121Google Scholar
Rettenmaier, JL, Keller, GG, Lattimer, JC, Corley, EA and Ellersieck, MR 2005 Prevalence of canine hip dysplasia in a veterinary teaching hospital population. Veterinary Radiology and Ultrasound 43: 313318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rodenburg, TB, Bijma, P, Ellen, ED, Bergsma, R, de Vries, S, Bolhuis, JE, Kemp, B and van Arendonk, JAM 2010 Breeding amiable animals? Improving farm animal welfare by including social effects in breeding programmes. Animal Welfare 19: S77S82Google Scholar
Rooney, N and Sargan, D 2009 Pedigree Dog Breeding in the UK: A Major Welfare Concern? Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals: Horsham, UK. Available at: www.rspca.org.uk/pedigreedogsGoogle Scholar
Rusbridge, C, Greitz, D and Iskander, BJ 2006 Syringomyelia: current concepts in pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment. Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 20: 469479Google Scholar
Steward, RC 1977 Industrial and non-industrial melanism in the peppered moth Biston betularia (L). Ecological Entomology 2: 231243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webster, AJF 2005 Animal Welfare: Limping Towards Eden. Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, UKGoogle Scholar