Associative learning by cattle to enable effective and ethical virtual fences

Lee, Caroline; Henshall, John; Wark, Tim; Crossman, Chris; Reed, M. T.; Brewer, Heather G.; O'Grady, J.; Fisher, Andrew

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2009.03.010

Cited by 77 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In an early study of auditory conditioning, cows learned to respond appropriately to the sound of an alarm within seven trials (Kiley-Worthingthon & Savage, 1978). Another study of associative learning showed that cows have the ability to quickly (after just a few sessions) learn an association between a non-aversive audio stimulus and an electric shock at a virtual fence boundary, and they maintained that learning without any other cues (Lee et al, 2009). Baldwin andStart (1978, 1981) showed that calves can learn to push their muzzles into an opening to break a beam of light, which turns the house lights on or off.…”

Section: Learning and Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Psychology of Cows

Marino¹,

Allen²

2017

ABC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-Domestic cows (Bos taurus) are consumed worldwide as beef and veal, kept as dairy product producers, employed as draft animals in labor, and are used for a long list of other products, including leather and manure. But despite global reliance on cows for thousands of years, most people's perception of them is as plodding herd animals with little individual personality and very simple social relationships or preferences. Yet, a review of the scientific literature on cow behavior points to more complex cognitive, emotional and social characteristics. Moreover, when cow behavior is addressed, it is almost entirely done within the framework of and applied to their use as food commodities. Therefore, there is relatively little attention to the study of cow intelligence, personality and sociality at a basic comparative level. In this review, we examine the current state of scientific knowledge about cows within an objective comparative framework, describing their cognitive, emotional, and social characteristics. Our aim is to provide a more veridical and objective current summary of cow psychology on its own terms and in ways which will facilitate better-informed comparisons with other animals. Moreover, an understanding of the capabilities and characteristics of domestic cows will, it is hoped, advance our understanding of who they are as individuals.

show abstract

Section: Learning and Cognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Psychology of Cows

Marino¹,

Allen²

2017

ABC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Bij ongewenst gebruik van de stalruimte kan dat mogelijk worden geweten aan ontwerpfouten. Lang geleden is door Brantas (1968) al een Een aantal onderzoeken is gericht op het sturen van dieren door middel van virtual fences (BishopHurley et al, 2007;Lee et al, 2009;Lee et al, 2007;Umstatter, 2011). Van belang is dat dier snapt wat het gewenste gedrag is, ofwel wat het zou moeten doen om een negatieve prikkel te ontlopen (associative learning) (Lee et al, 2007;Umstatter, 2011).…”

Section: Sturen Van Uitscheidingsgedrag Van Runderenunclassified

“…Volgens ander onderzoek (Lee et al, 2008) is de negatieve impact van elektrische schokken voor de dieren gering, en vergelijkbaar met even vastzetten in een box. Het blijkt dat runderen met audiosignalen binnen virtuele omheiningen gehouden kunnen worden (Lee et al, 2009 Gestart wordt met de opvang van de urine; opvang van feces in een later stadium.…”

Section: Sturen Van Uitscheidingsgedrag Van Runderenunclassified

Scheiding van urine en feces bij melkvee: fysiologie, gedragsherkenning en techniek

Verdoes

Bokma

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Moreover, any new technical devices must be tested and documented regarding functionality and possible effects on animal welfare before taken into use. Most previous studies on virtual fencing used only one single virtual border (Tiedemann et al, 1999;Jouven et al, 2012;Brunberg et al, 2016) and others a border surrounding a specific attraction (Lee et al, 2009), such as feed or another sheep. Cattle is the most investigated species when it comes to virtual fencing, usually tested individually or in very small groups (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cattle is the most investigated species when it comes to virtual fencing, usually tested individually or in very small groups (e.g. Bishop-Hurley et al, 2007;Lee et al, 2009;Umstatter et al, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The ability of ewes with lambs to learn a virtual fencing system

Brunberg

Bergslid

Bøe

et al. 2017

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Nofence technology is a GPS-based virtual fencing system designed to keep sheep within predefined borders, without using physical fences. Sheep wearing a Nofence collar receive a sound signal when crossing the virtual border and a weak electric shock if continuing to walk out from the virtual enclosure. Two experiments testing the functionality of the Nofence system and a new learning protocol is described. In Experiment 1, nine ewes with their lambs were divided into groups of three and placed in an experimental enclosure with one Nofence border. During 2 days, there was a physical fence outside the border, during Day 3 the physical fence was removed and on Day 4, the border was moved to the other end of the enclosure. The sheep received between 6 and 20 shocks with an average of 10.9 ± 2.0 (mean ± SE) per ewe during all 4 days. The number of shocks decreased from 4.38 ± 0.63 on Day 3 (when the physical fence was removed) to 1.5 ± 0.71 on Day 4 (when the border was moved). The ewes spent on average 3%, 6%, 46% and 9% of their time outside the border on Days 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. In Experiment 2, 32 ewes, with and without lambs, were divided into groups of eight and placed in an experimental enclosure. On Day 1, the enclosure was fenced with three physical fences and one virtual border, which was then increased to two virtual borders on Day 2. To continue to Day 3, when there was supposed to be three virtual borders on the enclosure, at least 50% of the ewes in a group should have received a maximum of four shocks on Day 2. None of the groups reached this learning criterion and the experiment ended after Day 2. The sheep received 4.1 ± 0.32 shocks on Day 1 and 4.7 ± 0.28 shocks on Day 2. In total, 71% of the ewes received the maximum number of five shocks on Day 1 and 77% on Day 2. The individual ewes spent between 0% and 69.5% of Day 1 in the exclusion zone and between 0% and 64% on Day 2. In conclusion, it is too challenging to ensure an efficient learning and hence, animal welfare cannot be secured. There were technical challenges with the collars that may have affected the results. The Nofence prototype was unable to keep the sheep within the intended borders, and thus cannot replace physical fencing for sheep.

show abstract

Associative learning by cattle to enable effective and ethical virtual fences

Cited by 77 publications

References 9 publications

The Psychology of Cows

The Psychology of Cows

Scheiding van urine en feces bij melkvee: fysiologie, gedragsherkenning en techniek

The ability of ewes with lambs to learn a virtual fencing system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About