98
A. V. Sykes and C. Gestal
being dependable “on the freedom to react appropriately and adequately to” a set
of different aspects, such as: “hunger, thirst or incorrect food; thermal and physical
discomfort; injuries or diseases; fear and chronic stress, and thus, the freedom to
display normal, species-specific behavioural patterns and adapt to changing living
conditions up to a level that is perceived as positive”. Despite being quite reasonable, dynamic and complete, these authors warned that this definition still does not
consider positive emotions. On the other hand, welfare should be considered “as a
measure of biological function, (…) not considered a static concept”, but should
contemplate “(…) the dynamics of the individual’s interaction with its environment
over time”.
“Cephalopods welfare” is a recent subject in most of the European countries
due to the inclusion of this class on the latest European Union (EU) animal welfare
legislation (“Directive 2010/63/EU” (EU 2010)). Nonetheless, legislation regarding the safeguard of cephalopod welfare has long been enforced in non-European
countries such as New Zealand, Australia (ACT 2012) and Canada (Harvey-Clark
2011). Within the EU, animal welfare legislation was only applied to cephalopods
in the UK under the scope of the Animals Act 1986 updated by the Animal Welfare
Bill 58 (Bennett 2005) and to octopus and squid in Norway by the Animal Welfare
Act 2010.
Cephalopod researchers and technicians have been trying to promote the best
welfare practices since there is a need to keep these animals for research or public
display purposes. This new EU legislation, based on the enforcement of the 3 Rs
(reduction, refinement and replacement) policy suggested by Russell et al. (1992)
and with the ultimate goal of replacing the use of animals in experimentation, is officially endorsed by the European Science Foundation since 2001 and, for the first
time, includes the class Cephalopoda. This Directive is likely to have a high impact
and many practical implications for researchers that use cephalopods in their investigation, irrespective of its field of research, and for those performing research with
aquaculture development purposes (Sykes et al. 2012). It covers animal welfare, experimental design, housing, husbandry and experimental protocols. Implementation
of the Directive in cephalopods welfare will also require guidelines for different
species. There is lack of scientific data to support the fact that cephalopods are actually able to feel pain and suffering (see a review on this discussion in Sykes et al.
2012). Nonetheless, not only do cephalopod researchers cherish their working models but they also agree that, despite no scientific evidence is known or published,
the enforcement of pre-emptive measures is needed. This chapter does not intend
to accomplish that mission. Actually, it just centres on the cephalopod immune system, disruption of welfare under culture conditions and the resulting pathologies.
6.1.2 “Pathology” in Cephalopods
The practice of good (positive) or bad (negative) welfare in research, maintenance,
rearing or culture conditions will determine the existence of pathologies. The cause
of pathologies may be divided into viral, bacterial, fungal, parasitic, chemical and
A. V. Sykes and C. Gestal
being dependable “on the freedom to react appropriately and adequately to” a set
of different aspects, such as: “hunger, thirst or incorrect food; thermal and physical
discomfort; injuries or diseases; fear and chronic stress, and thus, the freedom to
display normal, species-specific behavioural patterns and adapt to changing living
conditions up to a level that is perceived as positive”. Despite being quite reasonable, dynamic and complete, these authors warned that this definition still does not
consider positive emotions. On the other hand, welfare should be considered “as a
measure of biological function, (…) not considered a static concept”, but should
contemplate “(…) the dynamics of the individual’s interaction with its environment
over time”.
“Cephalopods welfare” is a recent subject in most of the European countries
due to the inclusion of this class on the latest European Union (EU) animal welfare
legislation (“Directive 2010/63/EU” (EU 2010)). Nonetheless, legislation regarding the safeguard of cephalopod welfare has long been enforced in non-European
countries such as New Zealand, Australia (ACT 2012) and Canada (Harvey-Clark
2011). Within the EU, animal welfare legislation was only applied to cephalopods
in the UK under the scope of the Animals Act 1986 updated by the Animal Welfare
Bill 58 (Bennett 2005) and to octopus and squid in Norway by the Animal Welfare
Act 2010.
Cephalopod researchers and technicians have been trying to promote the best
welfare practices since there is a need to keep these animals for research or public
display purposes. This new EU legislation, based on the enforcement of the 3 Rs
(reduction, refinement and replacement) policy suggested by Russell et al. (1992)
and with the ultimate goal of replacing the use of animals in experimentation, is officially endorsed by the European Science Foundation since 2001 and, for the first
time, includes the class Cephalopoda. This Directive is likely to have a high impact
and many practical implications for researchers that use cephalopods in their investigation, irrespective of its field of research, and for those performing research with
aquaculture development purposes (Sykes et al. 2012). It covers animal welfare, experimental design, housing, husbandry and experimental protocols. Implementation
of the Directive in cephalopods welfare will also require guidelines for different
species. There is lack of scientific data to support the fact that cephalopods are actually able to feel pain and suffering (see a review on this discussion in Sykes et al.
2012). Nonetheless, not only do cephalopod researchers cherish their working models but they also agree that, despite no scientific evidence is known or published,
the enforcement of pre-emptive measures is needed. This chapter does not intend
to accomplish that mission. Actually, it just centres on the cephalopod immune system, disruption of welfare under culture conditions and the resulting pathologies.
6.1.2 “Pathology” in Cephalopods
The practice of good (positive) or bad (negative) welfare in research, maintenance,
rearing or culture conditions will determine the existence of pathologies. The cause
of pathologies may be divided into viral, bacterial, fungal, parasitic, chemical and