Health of farmed fish: its relation to fish welfare and its utility as welfare indicator

This brief review focuses on health and biological function as cornerstones of fish welfare. From the function-based point of view, good welfare is reflected in the ability of the animal to cope with infectious and non-infectious stressors, thereby maintaining homeostasis and good health, whereas stressful husbandry conditions and protracted suffering will lead to the loss of the coping ability and, thus, to impaired health. In the first part of the review, the physiological processes through which stressful husbandry conditions modulate health of farmed fish are examined. If fish are subjected to unfavourable husbandry conditions, the resulting disruption of internal homeostasis necessitates energy-demanding physiological adjustments (allostasis/acclimation). The ensuing energy drain leads to trade-offs with other energy-demanding processes such as the functioning of the primary epithelial barriers (gut, skin, gills) and the immune system. Understanding of the relation between husbandry conditions, allostatic responses and fish health provides the basis for the second theme developed in this review, the potential use of biological function and health parameters as operational welfare indicators (OWIs). Advantages of function- and health-related parameters are that they are relatively straightforward to recognize and to measure and are routinely monitored in most aquaculture units, thereby providing feasible tools to assess fish welfare under practical farming conditions. As the efforts to improve fish welfare and environmental sustainability lead to increasingly diverse solutions, in particular integrated production, it is imperative that we have objective OWIs to compare with other production forms, such as high-density aquaculture. However, to receive the necessary acceptance for legislation, more robust scientific backing of the health- and function-related OWIs is urgently needed.

Biomass and Stored Carbohydrate Compensation after Above-Ground Biomass Removal in a Perennial Herb: Does Environmental Productivity Play a Role?

Many plant species are able to tolerate severe disturbance leading to removal of a substantial portion of the body by resprouting from intact or fragmented organs. Resprouting enables plants to compensate for biomass loss and complete their life cycles. The degree of disturbance tolerance, and hence the ecological advantage of damage tolerance (in contrast to alternative strategies), has been reported to be affected by environmental productivity. In our study, we examined the influence of soil nutrients (as an indicator of environmental productivity) on biomass and stored carbohydrate compensation after removal of aboveground parts in the perennial resprouter Plantago lanceolata. Specifically, we tested and compared the effects of nutrient availability on biomass and carbon storage in damaged and undamaged individuals. Damaged plants of P. lanceolata compensated neither in terms of biomass nor overall carbon storage. However, whereas in the nutrient-poor environment, root total non-structural carbohydrate concentrations (TNC) were similar for damaged and undamaged plants, in the nutrient-rich environment, damaged plants had remarkably higher TNC than undamaged plants. Based on TNC allocation patterns, we conclude that tolerance to disturbance is promoted in more productive environments, where higher photosynthetic efficiency allows for successful replenishment of carbohydrates. Although plants under nutrient-rich conditions did not compensate in terms of biomass or seed production, they entered winter with higher content of carbohydrates, which might result in better performance in the next growing season. This otherwise overlooked compensation mechanism might be responsible for inconsistent results reported from other studies.

An indicator framework for assessing livelihood resilience in the context of social–ecological dynamics

Livelihood resilience draws attention to the factors and processes that keep livelihoods functioning despite change and thus enriches the livelihood approach which puts people, their differential capabilities to cope with shocks and how to reduce poverty and improve adaptive capacity at the centre of analysis. However, the few studies addressing resilience from a livelihood perspective take different approaches and focus only on some dimensions of livelihoods. This paper presents a framework that can be used for a comprehensive empirical analysis of livelihood resilience. We use a concept of resilience that considers agency as well as structure. A review of both theoretical and empirical literature related to livelihoods and resilience served as the basis to integrate the perspectives. The paper identifies the attributes and indicators of the three dimensions of resilience, namely, buffer capacity, self-organisation and capacity for learning. The framework has not yet been systematically tested; however, potentials and limitations of the components of the framework are explored and discussed by drawing on empirical examples from literature on farming systems. Besides providing a basis for applying the resilience concept in livelihood-oriented research, the framework offers a way to communicate with practitioners on identifying and improving the factors that build resilience. It can thus serve as a tool for monitoring the effectiveness of policies and practices aimed at building livelihood resilience.