Event Abstract

Back to Event

Cognitive bias test as a tool for accessing fish welfare

Krzysztof Wojtas1*, Przemyslaw Przemyslaw Cwynar1 and Roman Kolacz1
  • 1 Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Department of Animal Welfare, Poland

Introduction With growing focus on fish welfare it is important to develop methods for accessing welfare in farmed fish (Ashley, 2007). One of the biggest issues is to investigate fish affective states (Kittilsen, 2013; Martins et al., 2012). While measuring stress response via corticoid hormones might be a solution in short term stressful events there is a big difficulty in measuring long term welfare. Something that could be stated as “quality of life”. In presented research we investigated whether cognitive bias test (Baciadonna & McElligott, 2015) could be used as a tool for accessing fish welfare in terms of living conditions. Materials and Methods A total number of 96 zebrafish (Danio rerio) wild type was used for this experiment. Fish were preconditioned to recognise and associate green colour with a reward (food) and red colour with punishment (being chased with a fish net). Afterwards fish were divided into two groups. Group I (enriched tank with hiding and gentle light) and Group II (barren tank with strong light). Test consisted of five arm radial maze subjected underwater similar to this used for rats by O. Burman et al. (2009) but with arms of 30cm length. Fish was first presented to red arm and punished, than to green arm and rewarded. Than the actual test began. We tested on how willing the fish is to enter the unknown arms of witch one is more similar and closer to green arm, one neutral in the centre and one more similar and closer to red arm. Results Fish from group I exhibited more exploratory behaviour, they spend in total over 28% of the test time in arms with unknown clues compared to 7,5% in group II. Animals from group II spend most of the time (39% of total observation time) in the safe (green) area as oppose to group I where animals explored more and spend only 12% of the time in the safe zone. Animals from the enriched tanks explored even the punishment zone (red) as they spend 4,8% of the time there. Fish in group II avoided this part of the testing chamber with just an incidental occurrences with just 0,8% of the test time. Conclusions and Discussion Difference in behaviour during the cognitive bias test suggests that fish cognitive bias can be affected by living conditions. Therefore this type of test should be taken to consideration as a tool in further fish welfare studies. It can be especially useful in studies concerning influence of living conditions that cannot be examined in direct way for example by preference test.

References

Ashley, P. J. (2007). Fish welfare: Current issues in aquaculture. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 104(3-4), 199–235. doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.09.001
Baciadonna, L., & McElligott, A. (2015). The use of judgement bias to assess welfare in farm livestock. Animal Welfare, 24, 81–91. doi:10.7120/09627286.24.1.081
Burman, O. H. P., Parker, R. M. a, Paul, E. S., & Mendl, M. T. (2009). Anxiety-induced cognitive bias in non-human animals. Physiology & Behavior, 98(3), 345–50. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2009.06.012
Kittilsen, S. (2013). Functional aspects of emotions in fish. Behavioural Processes, 100(0376), 153–9. doi:10.1016/j.beproc.2013.09.002
Martins, C. I. M., Galhardo, L., Noble, C., Damsgård, B., Spedicato, M. T., Zupa, W., … Kristiansen, T. (2012). Behavioural indicators of welfare in farmed fish. Fish Physiology and Biochemistry, 38(1), 17–41. doi:10.1007/s10695-011-9518-8

Keywords: cognitive bias, environmental enrichement, welfare, fish, afective states, operant conditioning

Conference: XV European Congress of Ichthyology, Porto, Portugal, 7 Sep - 11 Sep, 2015.

Presentation Type: Poster Presentation

Topic: Physiology, Behavior and Toxicology

Citation: Wojtas K, Przemyslaw Cwynar P and Kolacz R (2015). Cognitive bias test as a tool for accessing fish welfare. Front. Mar. Sci. Conference Abstract: XV European Congress of Ichthyology. doi: 10.3389/conf.FMARS.2015.03.00200

Copyright: The abstracts in this collection have not been subject to any Frontiers peer review or checks, and are not endorsed by Frontiers. They are made available through the Frontiers publishing platform as a service to conference organizers and presenters.

The copyright in the individual abstracts is owned by the author of each abstract or his/her employer unless otherwise stated.

Each abstract, as well as the collection of abstracts, are published under a Creative Commons CC-BY 4.0 (attribution) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) and may thus be reproduced, translated, adapted and be the subject of derivative works provided the authors and Frontiers are attributed.

For Frontiers’ terms and conditions please see https://www.frontiersin.org/legal/terms-and-conditions.

Received: 20 Nov 2015; Published Online: 07 Dec 2015.

* Correspondence: PhD. Krzysztof Wojtas, Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Department of Animal Welfare, Wroclaw, Dolnoslaskie, 50-375, Poland, krzysztof.wojtas@up.wroc.pl