|
|
Mazurek, M., McGee, M., Minchin, W., Crowe, M. A., & Earley, B. (2011). Is the avoidance distance test for the assessment of animals' responsiveness to humans influenced by either the dominant or flightiest animal in the group? Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 132(3-4), 107–113.
Abstract: A previously described (Windschnurer et al., 2009) avoidance distance test was used to assess animals’ fear of humans in order to quantify the human–animal relationship (HAR). This study investigated the influence of the dominant and flightiest animals within a group on the responsiveness of animals during the avoidance distance test. Eighty-eight pregnant heifers comprised of four different genotypes were used (22 animals per genotype): Limousin × Holstein-Friesian, Limousin × Simmental, Charolais × Limousin, and Charolais × Simmental. Sixty of the 88 heifers were group housed (n = 5) into 12 pens with 3 pens per breed, while 28 heifers were singly housed (seven heifers per breed). A reactivity test was performed on days 10, 18, 25 and 30 post-housing on the singly housed heifers, and then on the group housed heifers, on the same days, to calculate a reactivity score. On days 33 and 37 flight and dominance tests, respectively, were performed to identify the flightiest and the dominant animal within each group. On day 41, an avoidance test, measuring both the avoidance distance towards a familiar and an unfamiliar human, was performed on all heifers. No difference (P > 0.05) in reactivity scores was found between the genotypes, between pens for the group housed heifers or between singly housed and group housed heifers (P = 0.28). The avoidance distance (AD) of singly (S) housed heifers towards a familiar (F) (ADSF) human was shorter (P < 0.001) than the avoidance distance of group (G) housed heifers towards an unfamiliar human (ADSU). The ADSF and ADGF were correlated with the ADSU and ADGU (R = 0.87 for singly housed heifers; R = 0.61 for group housed heifers, P < 0.001). For the singly housed heifers, no correlation was observed between reactivity score and ADSF (R = 0.36, P = 0.18), whereas the reactivity score and ADSU were correlated (R = 0.68, P = 0.004). For the group housed heifers no significant correlation was detected between the reactivity score and ADGF (R = 0.18, P = 0.22) or ADGU (R = −0.11, P = 0.39). No influence of the most dominant animal and the flightiest animals was found on the behaviour of the group in term of avoidance distance and reactivity (P > 0.05). It is concluded that the assessment of the fear of the animals towards humans using the avoidance test at the feed bunk may be useful for singly and group housed heifers and that the leaders of a group such as the flightiest animal or the dominant animal did not influence the avoidance distance test.
|
|
|
|
Schmied, C., Waiblinger, S., Scharl, T., Leisch, F., & Boivin, X. (2008). Stroking of different body regions by a human: Effects on behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 109(1), 25–38.
Abstract: From observations of intra-specific social grooming in cattle and studies on human stroking in other species, we hypothesised that cows' reactions to human stroking differ depending on the body regions being stroked. Moreover, we tested, whether cows `reactions to stroking change with the animals' experience of stroking. Sixty dairy cows were stroked in three different body regions, i.e. the withers, W, neck ventral, NV (both licked often in social grooming) and the lateral chest, LC (licked rarely), in a balanced order during 10-min sessions. Behavioural reactions and heart rate during stroking as well as reactions to the human just after stroking were recorded. Two test sessions were carried out with 3 weeks of treatment in-between. During this period, the cows were randomly allocated to four treatment groups: three groups received 5 min of daily stroking in either W, NV or LC and the last one (control group) was exposed to simple human presence. During stroking W and NV, cows showed longer neck stretching and ear hanging than during stroking LC (P < 0.001). Moreover, ear hanging was shown longer when W was stroked as compared to NV (P < 0.001), but neck stretching was observed longer during stroking NV as compared to W only after the treatment period (P < 0.01). In the first test session, more animals showed head shaking and head throwing during stroking W and NV than LC (P < 0.01), whereas in the second test session these behaviours were observed only in few animals. In the first test session heart rate was higher during stroking W than the other body regions (P <= 0.01). In the second test session, the lowest heart rate was found during stroking NV (P < 0.05). Finally, contact with the experimenter following stroking differed for the three body regions stroked in both test sessions (first: P = 0.06, second: P < 0.01); contact was shortest for LC. When comparing both test sessions, stretching the neck and ear hanging increased (P < 0.001), while head shaking and head throwing decreased (P < 0.05); there was no difference for heart rate and contact with the experimenter. The four treatments had no influence on reactions to stroking. To conclude, stroking of body regions often licked during social grooming led to more responses than stroking the one licked rarely. Some reactions, such as stretching the neck, are also observed during social licking. This suggests that cows may in part perceive human stroking of body regions often licked similarly to social licking. This knowledge could be of interest for an improvement in quality of human-cattle interactions.
|
|
|
|
Waiblinger, S., Boivin, X., Pedersen, V., Tosi, M. - V., Janczak, A. M., Visser, E. K., et al. (2006). Assessing the human-animal relationship in farmed species: A critical review. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 101(3-4), 185–242.
Abstract: The present paper focuses on six main issues. First, we briefly explain why an increased understanding of the human-animal relationship (HAR) is an essential component of any strategy intended to improve the welfare of farmed animals and their stockpersons. Second, we list the main internal and external factors that can influence the nature of the relationship and the interactions between human beings and farm animals. Third, we argue that the numerous tests that have been used to assess the HAR fall into three main categories (stationary human, moving human, handling/restraint), according to the degree of human involvement. Fourth, the requirements that any test of HAR must fulfil before it can be considered effective, and the ways in which the tests can be validated are discussed. Fifth, the various types of test procedures that have been used to assess the HAR in a range of farmed species are reviewed and critically discussed. Finally, some research perspectives that merit further attention are shown. The present review embraces a range of farmed animals. Our primary reasons for including a particular species were: whether or not general interest has been expressed in its welfare and its relationship with humans, whether relevant literature was available, and whether it is farmed in at least some European countries. Therefore, we include large and small ruminants (cattle, sheep, goats), pigs, poultry (chickens), fur animals (foxes, mink) and horses. Although horses are primarily used for sport, leisure or therapy they are farmed as draught, food or breeding animals in many countries. Literature on the HAR in other species was relatively scarce so they receive no further mention here.
|
|
|
|
Henry, S., Hemery, D., Richard, M. - A., & Hausberger, M. (2005). Human-mare relationships and behaviour of foals toward humans. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 93(3-4), 341–362.
Abstract: We studied experimentally whether horse dams influenced foals' relationships with humans. We investigated the influence of the establishment of positive human-mare relationships on foals' behaviour toward humans. Forty-one foals and their dams were involved in this experiment. Half of the mares were softly brushed and fed by hand during a short period (total of 1.25 h) during the first 5 days of their foals' lives (experimental group, n = 21). The other mares were not handled experimentally and their foals received no contact with the experimenter (control group, n = 20). The reactions of both experimental and control foals were recorded under various conditions, first, for 5 min in the presence of a motionless experimenter, when foals were 15 and 30-35 days old, then in an approach test when they were 15 days old and in a saddle-pad tolerance test when they were 30-35 days old. Finally, approach-stroking tests were performed successively by the familiar experimenter when foals were 11-13 months old and by an unfamiliar person when they were 13-15 months old. Several observations strongly suggest that mares can influence their foals' behaviour toward humans: (1) during the handling procedure, experimental foals of protective mares were further from the handler than foals of calm mares (p < 0.001); (2) experimental foals remained, at all ages, closer to the experimenter (p < 0.05) and initiated more physical contacts (sniffing, licking, etc.) with the experimenter (p < 0.05) than control foals; (3) avoidance and flight responses of experimental foals were considerably reduced during approaches by the experimenter (p < 0.01) and they accepted saddle-pads on their backs more easily (p < 0.01) and more quickly (p < 0.01) than control foals. Lastly, the consequences of handling mares had effects that lasted at least until foals were one year old (p < 0.05) and became generalized from experimenter to unfamiliar humans, who could approach and stroke experimental foals rapidly during a test (p < 0.05). This is the first report of an attempt to use observation of mother by foals to facilitate human-foal relationships. The procedure is simple, takes little time and can easily be applied to any dam-foal pair, as it is not intrusive and presents no risks of disrupting mare-foal bonds.
|
|
|
|
Sondergaard, E., & Ladewig, J. (2004). Group housing exerts a positive effect on the behaviour of young horses during training. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 87(1-2), 105–118.
Abstract: In an experiment on the effects of social environment and training on the human-animal relationship, 20 horses were handled according to a defined schedule. Eight horses were housed singly and 12 horses were housed in four groups of 3 horses. Horses were handled three times per week in 10 min sessions from an age of 6 months until 2 years of age during two winter periods. A total of 50 and 70 sessions were given in the first and second period, respectively. Five randomly allocated people performed the training. The training scheme involved leading, tying up, touching, lifting feet, etc. in 43 stages. The horse had to fulfil the performance criteria of each stage in order to get to the next stage. In the first winter period, horses were led to the stable when they had “passed” a stage or after 10 min of training. In the second winter period, horses would start off at stage 1 again, and when they “passed” a stage they went on to the next stage within the same training session. Because of the change in training procedure results were analysed separately for the two winter periods. There was a significant difference between trainers in the number of times they allowed a horse to “pass” a stage within each winter period (χ32, P<0.05; χ32, P<0.001 for the first and the second winter period, respectively). Group housed horses “passed” more stages than single housed horses (17 versus 14; 27 versus 18 in the first and second winter period, respectively; P<0.05 for the interaction). Singly housed horses bit the trainer more frequently than did group housed horses (P<0.01). The responses of group housed horses to training clearly demonstrate the benefits of raising young horses in groups.
|
|
|
|
Rousing, T., & Waiblinger, S. (2004). Evaluation of on-farm methods for testing the human-animal relationship in dairy herds with cubicle loose housing systems--test-retest and inter-observer reliability and consistency to familiarity of test person. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 85(3-4), 215–231.
Abstract: The human-animal relationship is an important factor when considering animal welfare at herd level. In the present study, two behavioural tests for the on-farm assessment of the human-animal relationship at herd level of dairy cows housed in loose housing cubicle systems were evaluated with respect to inter-observer reliability, test-retest reliability, effect of familiarity of test person as well as inter-correlation of the two tests. In a voluntary animal approach (VAA) test, the number of cows and the latencies to approach and touch a stationary test person was measured. In an avoidance (AV) test, the cows' avoidance reactions to an approaching test person were categorised. A first study was carried out in 12 commercial Danish and Austrian dairy farms. On each farm, both behaviour tests were carried out on the same day and repeated within 4-5 days. For each test, cows were tested by both an unfamiliar and a familiar test person (the stock-person) and two observers simultaneously registered the animals' test responses. The inter-observer reliability of both behavioural tests was found to be high (VAA: 2.5-m approach r=0.98 (P<0.001) and touch r=0.97 (P<0.001); AV: Kappa coefficientweighted=0.886 (prevalence index for flight distance>=2 m is 0.636)). The cows at herd level showed shortest latency for touching an unfamiliar test person on the first test day (P=0.006). Further, the AV test had a high test-retest reliability (Kappa coefficientweighted=0.503 (prevalence index for flight distance>=2 m is -0.660)) and results indicated no effect of familiarity of test person (Kappa coefficientweighted=0.463 (prevalence index for flight distance>=2 m is -0.677)). In a second study, the correlation between the two behavioural tests (similar measures) was evaluated. On each of 10 commercial Danish dairy farms with loose housing cubicle systems at four repeated sessions, both behaviour tests were carried out on the same day. For each test cows were tested by the stock-person. The VAA and AV tests at herd level were highly correlated (rs=-0.84; P=0.002). The results suggest that the AV test is valid and applicable for on-farm assessment of the human-animal relationship at herd level. This accounts only partly for the VAA test, which seem to be more unclear regarding motivation for the animals' approach behaviour.
|
|
|
|
Sondergaard, E., & Halekoh, U. (2003). Young horses' reactions to humans in relation to handling and social environment. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 84(4), 265–280.
Abstract: Forty Danish warmblood colts in two replicates were used to investigate the effect of housing and handling in the rearing period on the reactions to humans. The horses entered the experiment after weaning and were housed either individually (n=16) or in groups of three (n=24). Half of the horses from each housing group were handled three times per week for a period of 10 min. Approach tests were performed in the home environment when the horses were 6, 9, 12, 18, 21, and 24 months old, and an Arena and Human Encounter test was performed in a novel environment when the horses were 12 and 24 months old, respectively. In the home environment, single-housed horses approached sooner and were more easily approached by a human than group-housed horses where no effect of handling was observed. Horses approached sooner and were more easily approached with increasing age. In the Arena and Human Encounter test, single-housed horses expressed less restless behaviour, more explorative behaviour, and less vocalisation than group-housed horses. Handled horses showed lower increase in heart rate during the test than non-handled horses. There was no difference between the number of times single or group-housed horses touched an unfamiliar person in the Arena and Human Encounter test but handled horses approached sooner than non-handled horses. It is concluded that the social environment affected the way horses reacted to humans when tested in the home environment but not in a novel environment. In contrast, handling affected the reactions to humans when tested in the novel environment but not in the home environment. However, handled horses also reacted less to the novel environment in general, thus indicating that handling is a mean of avoiding potential dangerous situations.
|
|
|
|
Waiblinger, S., Menke, C., Korff, J., & Bucher, A. (2004). Previous handling and gentle interactions affect behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows during a veterinary procedure. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 85(1-2), 31–42.
Abstract: Veterinary and management procedures often are aversive to the animals, resulting in physiological and behavioural stress reactions, which increase the risk of accidents and might lower performance. We investigated the effects of previous positive handling and of gentle interactions during the procedure on behaviour and heart rate in dairy cows during rectal palpation with sham insemination. Twenty cows were allocated randomly into two groups of 10 animals: handling, received additional positive handling over a period of four weeks by one person (handler); control, only routine handling by different caretakers. The week after the handling period, tests lasting 9 min, including 4 min rectal palpation, were carried out with each animal on four successive days in four situations in a balanced order: cow is alone during the test, with the handler, with an usual caretaker, or with an unknown person. Behaviour and heart rate were recorded. Previously handled animals had lower heart rate during tests (P<=0.05, n=19), kicked less when alone (P<=0.05, n=19) and tended to show less restless behaviour (P<=0.1, n=19). Cows were further calmed by gentle interactions during the test, but people differed remarkably. Cows showed less restless behaviour when gentled by the handler, both in the 4 min of rectal palpation and in the 9 min test period (each: P<=0.001, n=19). No significant stress reducing effect was found for the other two persons. In conclusion, stress reactions of cows during rectal palpation/insemination can be reduced by previous positive handling as well as by a person providing positive, gentle interactions during the procedure. The results underline the importance of positive, gentle interactions with the animals to enhance animal welfare and reduce the risk of accidents. They also show that people differ in the success to calm down the animals in aversive situations and indicate the need to investigate the characteristics responsible for the differences and identify the preconditions for a stress reducing effect in future research.
|
|
|
|
Hausberger, M., & Muller, C. (2002). A brief note on some possible factors involved in the reactions of horses to humans. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 76(4), 339–344.
Abstract: In order to investigate relationships of adult horses to humans, we developed a simple evaluation test and scores based on observations. The first reactions of 224 adult horses to the presence of an experimenter were observed and scored. All these horses belonged to the same riding school, had the same general housing conditions and were all geldings. The evaluation was based on the horse's posture. Individual differences that could be related to some extent to the breed but also to human factors emerged clearly. French saddlebreds showed more often friendly behaviour than Angloarabs, whereas thoroughbreds were more indifferent. Clear variations occurred between groups of horses that depended on different caretakers. In this school, one caretaker is responsible for the whole daily management of a group of horses and is probably a very important factor in their well-being. The effects of this daily relation to a human seemed to be involved in the reactions to a strange person. Further studies are required to investigate what, in practice, may be determinant.
|
|
|
|
Kotrschal, K., Schöberl, I., Bauer, B., Thibeaut, A. - M., & Wedl, M. (2009). Dyadic relationships and operational performance of male and female owners and their male dogs. Behav. Process., 81(3), 383–391.
Abstract: In the paper we investigate how owner personality, attitude and gender influence dog behavior, dyadic practical functionality and the level of dog salivary cortisol. In three meetings, 12 female and 10 male owners of male dogs answered questionnaires including the Neo-FFI human personality inventory. Their dyadic behavior was video-taped in a number of test situations, and saliva samples were collected. Owners who scored highly in neuroticism (Neo-FFI dimension one) viewed their dogs as social supporters and spent much time with them. Their dogs had low baseline cortisol levels, but such dyads were less successful in the operational task. Owners who scored highly in extroversion (Neo-FFI dimension two) appreciated shared activities with their dogs which had relatively high baseline cortisol values. Dogs that had female owners were less sociable-active (dog personality axis 1) than dogs that had male owners. Therefore, it appears that owner gender and personality influences dyadic interaction style, dog behavior and dyadic practical functionality.
|
|
