Palabras clave
producción animal; bienestar animal, consideraciones éticas, bienestar de los invertebrados, erizo de mar, principio 5R.
Cómo citar
Resumen
Introducción: Aunque sólo unas pocas especies son consideradas peligrosas, plagas o vectores, la mayoría de los invertebrados producen un sentimiento de aversión en el ser humano. Esto ha contribuido al retraso en el desarrollo de consideraciones éticas respecto a este grupo en comparación con los vertebrados, a excepción de los cefalópodos.
Objetivo: En el presente trabajo, proporcionamos una visión general de la situación actual en materia de ética y bienestar animal con el fin de contribuir al desarrollo de un marco para garantizar el bienestar de los invertebrados.
Métodos: Hoy en día, el bienestar animal es de naturaleza multidisciplinaria en un grado muy alto, ya que incluye etología, fisiología, patología, bioquímica, genética, inmunología, nutrición, cognitivo-neural, medicina veterinaria y ética. El bienestar animal es un concepto complejo, difícil de lograr con éxito desde una sola perspectiva.
Resultados: Como consecuencia, proponemos incluir los cinco dominios (nutrición, ambiente, salud, comportamiento y estado mental) junto con las tres concepciones (Salud básica y funcionamiento, estado afectivo y vida natural), así como el Principio 5R (Reemplazar, Reducir, Refinar, Respetar y Responsabilidad) en la búsqueda de alcanzar un estado de bienestar integral.
Conclusiones: Consideramos que tanto en la investigación como en la producción animal coexisten las preocupaciones éticas individuales y colectivas y, de hecho, la principal preocupación moral a dar cuenta es la colectiva y que, dentro de esa visión colectiva, se debe aplicar la preocupación moral individual. con responsabilidad y respeto por la persona. Finalmente, proponemos un ejemplo práctico de producción de bienestar de invertebrados en la acuicultura de erizos de mar con el objetivo de incluir la producción animal de invertebrados en esta importante discusión.
Citas
Anderson, R. C., Mather, J. A., Monette, M. Q., & Zimsen, S. R. (2010). Octopuses (Enteroctopus dofleini) recognize individual humans. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 13(3), 261–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2010.483892.
Botreau, R., Veissier, I., Butterworth, A., Bracke, M. B., & Keeling, L. J. (2007). Definition of criteria for overall assessment of animal welfare. Animal Welfare, 16(2), 225–228.
Bovenkerk, B., & Verweij, M. (2016). Between individualistic animal ethics and holistic environmental ethics blurring the boundaries. In B. Bovenkerk & J. Keulartz (Eds.), Animal Ethics in the Age of Humans (pp. 369–385). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44206-8_22
Brambell, R. (1965). Report of the Technical Committee to Enquire Into the Welfare of Animals Kept Under Intensive Livestock Husbandry Systems. Her Majesty’s Stationery Office.
Brusca, R. C., Moore, W., & Schuster, M. (2016). Invertebrates. Sinauer Associated Inc. Publishers.
Camazine, S., Deneubourg, J. L., Franks, N. R., Sneyd, J., Theraula, G., & Bonabeau, E. (2001). Self organization in biological systems. Princeton University Press.
Carere, C., & Mather, J. (2019). The welfare of invertebrate animals. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13947-6
Crespi-Abril, A. C., & Rubilar, T. (2018). Ética e invertebrados: análisis de los casos de los cefalópodos y equinodermos. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Críticos Animales, 8, 210–232.
Crespi-Abril, A. C., & Rubilar, T. (2021). Moving forward in the ethical consideration of invertebrates in experimentation: Beyond the Three R’s Principle. Revista de Biología Tropical, 69(S1), 346–357. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v69iSuppl.1.46366
Donovan, J., & Adams, C. J. (1996). Beyond animal rights: A feminist caring ethic for the treatment of animals. The Continuum Publishing Co.
Edgar, J. L., Mullan, S. M., Pritchard, J. C., McFarlane, U. J., & Main, D. C. (2013). Towards a ‘good life’ for farm animals: Development of a resource tier framework to achieve positive welfare for laying hens. Animals, 3(3), 584–605. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani3030584
Elwood, R. W. (2019). Assessing the potential for pain in crustaceans and other invertebrates. In C. Carere & J. Mather (Eds.), The Welfare of Invertebrate Animals (pp. 147–178). Springer.
European Union. (2010). Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes. Official Journal of the European Communities. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32010L0063
Farm Animal Welfare Committee. (1992). FAWC updates the five freedoms. Veterinary Record, 17, 357.
Farm Animal Welfare Committee. (2009). Farm animal welfare in Great Britain: Past, present and future. Farm Animal Welfare Council.
Farm Animal Welfare Committee. (2012). Farm Animal Welfare: Health and Disease. Farm and Welfare Committee.
Fraser, D. (1999). Animal ethics and animal welfare science: bridging the two cultures. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 65(3), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00090-8
Fraser, D. (2008a). Understanding animal welfare. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, 50(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/1751-0147-50-S1-S1
Fraser, D. (2008b). Understanding Animal Welfare: The Science in its Cultural Context. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing.
Fraser, D., Weary, D. M., Pajor, E. A., & Milligan, B. N. (1997). A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Animal Welfare, 6, 187–205.
Green, T. C., & Mellor, D. J. (2011). Extending ideas about animal welfare assessment to include ‘quality of life’ and related concepts. New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 59(6), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2011.610283
Hemsworth, P. H., Mellor, D. J., Cronin, G. M., & Tilbrook, A. J. (2015). Scientific assessment of animal welfare. New Zealand Veterinary Journal, 63(1), 24–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2014.966167
Horvath, K., Angeletti, D., Nascetti, G., & Carere, C. (2013). Invertebrate welfare: an overlooked issue. Annali dell’Istituto Superiore di Sanità, 49, 9–17.
Jensen, P., & Toates, F. M. (1997). Stress as a state of motivational systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 53(1–2), 145–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(96)01156-2
Johnson, L. E. (1992). Toward the moral considerability of species and ecosystems. Environmental Ethics, 14(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics199214231
Kellert, S. R. (1993). Values and perceptions of invertebrates. Conservation Biology, 7(4), 845–855. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.740845.x
Lassen, J., Sandøe, P., & Forkman, B. (2006). Happy pigs are dirty!–conflicting perspectives on animal welfare. Livestock Science, 103(3), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2006.05.008
Lawrence, J. M. (2007). Edible sea urchins: use and life-history strategies. In J. M Lawrence (Ed.), Developments in Aquaculture and Fisheries Science (Vol. 37, pp. 1–9). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9309(07)80065-2
Lehman, H. (1988). On the moral acceptability of killing animals. Journal of Agricultural Ethics, 1(2), 155–162.
Lucey, N., Aube, C., Herwig, A., & Collin, R. (2022). Compound extreme events induce rapid mortality in a tropical sea urchin. The Biological Bulletin, 243(2), 239–254.
Martín-García, J. A., & Luque-Escalona, A. (2008). Capacidad de retorno de Diadema antillarum (Echinodermata: Echinoidea). Anales Universitarios de Etología, 2, 125–131.
Mashanov, V. S., Zueva, O. R., Heinzeller, T., & Dolmatov, I. Y. (2006). Ultrastructure of the Circumoral Nerve Ring and the Radial Nerve Cords in Holothurians (Echinodermata). Zoomorphology, 125(1), 27–38.
Mashanov, V., Zueva, O., Rubilar, T., Epherra, L., & García-Arrarás, J. E. (2015). Echinodermata. In A. Schmidt-Rhaesa, S. Harzsch, & G. Purschke (Eds.), Structure and Evolution of Invertebrate Nervous System (pp. 665–689). Oxford University Press.
Mason, G. J., & Mendl, M. (1993). Why is there no simple way of measuring animal welfare? Animal Welfare, 2, 301–319.
Mather, J. A. (2012). Why (and how) personalities in invertebrates? Current Zoology, 58(4), 566.
Mather, J. A. (2016). An invertebrate perspective on pain. Animal Sentience, 1(3), 12. https://doi.org/ 10.51291/2377-7478.1046
Mather, J. A. & Carere, C. (2019). Consider the individual: personality and welfare in invertebrates. In C. Carere & J. Mather (Eds.) The Welfare of Invertebrate Animals (pp. 229–245). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13947-6_10
Mellor, D. J., & Beausoleil, N. J. (2015). Extending the ‘Five Domains’ model for animal welfare assessment to incorporate positive welfare states. Animal Welfare, 24(3), 241. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.24.3.241
Mellor, D., Patterson-Kane, E., & Stafford, K. J. (2009). The sciences of animal welfare. John Wiley & Sons.
Mellor, D. J., & Reid, C. S. W. (1994). Concepts of animal well-being and predicting the impact of procedures on experimental animals. In R. Baker, G. Jenkin & D. J. Mellor (Eds.), Improving the Well-being of Animals in the Research Environment (pp 3–18). Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching.
Mellor, D. J. & Stafford, K. J. (2008). Quality of life: a valuable concept or an unnecessary embellishment when considering animal welfare? The Welfare of Animals – It’s everyone’s business. Proceedings of the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy International Conference.
Midgley, M. (1983). Animals and why they matter. University of Georgia Press.
Midgley, M. (1986). Conflicts and inconsistencies over animal welfare the hume memorial lecture. The Universities Federation for Animal Welfare.
Mikhalevich, I., & Powell, R. (2020). Minds without spines: evolutionarily inclusive animal ethics. Animal Sentience, 29(1), 1–25.
Moussaid, M., Garnier, S., Theraulaz, G., & Helbing, D. (2009). Collective information processing and pattern formation in swarms, flocks, and crowds. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(3), 469–497. https://doi.org/10.51291/2377-7478.1527
Palmer, C. (2010). Animal ethics in context. Columbia University Press.
Pan, Y., Zhang, L., Lin, C., Sun, J., Kan, R., & Yang, H. (2015). Influence of Flow Velocity on Motor Behavior of Sea Cucumber Apostichopus Japonicus. Physiology and Behavior, 144, 52–59.
Parrish, J. K., & Edelstein-Keshet, L. (1999). Complexity, pattern, and evolutionary trade-offs in animal aggregation. Science, 284(5411), 99–101.
Pollo, S., & Vitale, A. (2019). Invertebrates and humans: science, ethics, and policy. In C. Carere & J. Mather (Eds.), The welfare of invertebrate animals (pp. 7–22). Springer.
Preece, R., & Chamberlain, L. (1993). Animal welfare & human values. Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
Regan, T. (1983). Animal rights, human wrongs. In N. J. Totowa (Ed.), Ethics and animals (pp. 19-43). Humana Press.
Rollin, B. E. (1990). The unheeded cry: Animal consciousness, animal pain and science. Oxford University Press.
Rollin, B. E. (1992). Animal rights and human morality (Ed.). Prometheus Books.
Rollin, B. E. (1993). Animal welfare, science, and value. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 6(2), 44–50.
Rollin, B. E. (1994). Animal production and the new social ethic for animals. Food Animal Well-Being. Purdue University Office of Agricultural Research Programs. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.1994.tb00349.x
Rollin, B. E. (1995). Farm animal welfare: social, bioethical, and research issues. Iowa State University Press.
Rubilar, T. & Cardozo, D. (2021). Blue growth: sea urchin sustainable aquaculture, innovative approaches. Revista de Biología Tropical, 69(S1), 474–486. https://doi.org/10.15517/RBT.V69ISUPPL.1.46388
Russell, W. M. S., & Burch, R. L. (1959). The principles of humane experimental technique. Methuen & Co. Ltd.
Sandøe, P., & Simonsen, H. B. (1992). Assessing animal welfare: where does science end and philosophy begin?. Animal Welfare, 1(4), 257–267. https://doi.org/10.7120/09627286.1.3.257
Schmidt-Rhaesa, A., Harzsch, S., & Purschke, G. (2015). Structure and evolution of invertebrate nervous systems. Oxford University Press.
Singer, P. (1990). Animal Liberation (2nd Ed.). Avon Books.
Stafleu, F., Grommers, F. J., & Vorstenbosch, J. (1996). Animal welfare: evolution and erosion of a moral concept. Animal Welfare, 5, 225–234.
Stefansson, G., Kristinsson, H., Ziemer, N., Hannon, C., & James, P. (2017). Markets for sea urchins: a review of global supply and markets [Technical report]. Skýrsla Matís. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.12657.99683
Sumpter, D. J. (2006). The principles of collective animal behaviour. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 361(1465), 5–22.
Thompson, P. B. (1993). Animals in the agrarian ideal. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 6(1), 36–49.
Turner, P. V., & Doonan, G. (2010). Developing on-farm euthanasia plans. The Canadian Veterinary Journal, 51(9), 1031–1034.
Varner, G. (1995). Can animal rights activists be environmentalists? In A. Light & H. Rolston (Eds.), Environmental Ethics. An Anthology, (Vol. 3, pp. 95–113). Blackwell Publishing.
Veissier, I., & Forkman, B. (2008). The nature of animal welfare science. Annual Review of Biomedical Sciences, 10, 15–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.5016/1806-8774.2008.v10pT15
Webster, J. (2011). Zoomorphism and anthropomorphism: fruitful fallacies? Animal Welfare, 20(1), 29–36.
Yoshimura, K., & Motokawa, T. (2008). Bilateral symmetry and locomotion: do elliptical regular sea urchins proceed along their longer body axis? Marine Biology, 154(5), 911–918.
Yoshimura, K., & Motokawa, T. (2010). Bilaterality in the Regular Sea Urchin Anthocidaris Crassispina is Related to Efficient Defense, not to Efficient Locomotion. Marine Biology, 157(11), 2475–2488.
Comentarios
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución 4.0.