Do Domestic Pigs Acquire a Positive Perception of Humans through Observational Social Learning?

Luna, Daniela; González, Catalina Estrada; Byrd, Christopher J; Palomo, Rocío; Huenul, Elizabeth; Figueroa, Jaime

doi:10.3390/ani11010127

Cited by 13 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Studies on poultry have shown that visual contact with an experimenter reduces birds' fear of handling [29], and can be more effective at reducing fear of humans than gentle tactile contact [30]. Recent research has also demonstrated that pigs' fear of humans is reduced when they observe a human stroking other pigs [31]. It is therefore possible that any treatment effects on responses in the HAT were diluted as a result of control sows receiving additional visual exposure to humans.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Positive Human Contact during Gestation on the Behaviour, Physiology and Reproductive Performance of Sows

Hayes

Hemsworth

Morrison³

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous positive interactions with humans may ameliorate the stress response of farm animals to aversive routine practices such as painful or stressful procedures, particularly those associated with stockpeople. We studied the effects of positive handling by providing younger (parity 1–2) and older (parity 3–8) sows housed in pens of fifteen (n = 24 pens in total) with either positive human contact (+HC) or routine human contact (control) during gestation. The +HC treatment involved a familiar stockperson patting and scratching sows and was imposed at a pen-level for 2 min daily. Measurements studied included behavioural, physiological and productivity variables. The +HC sows showed reduced avoidance of the stockperson conducting pregnancy testing and vaccination in the home pens, however the behavioural and cortisol responses of sows in a standard unfamiliar human approach test did not differ. There were no effects of +HC on aggression between sows, serum cortisol or serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor concentrations during gestation, or on the behavioural and cortisol response to being moved to farrowing crates. There were also no effects of +HC on the maternal responsiveness of sows, farrowing rate or the number of piglets born alive, stillborn or weaned. Sows in the +HC pens reduced their physical interaction with the stockpeople imposing the treatment after 2 weeks, which suggests the sows may have habituated to the novel or possible rewarding elements of the handling treatment. This experiment shows that regular positive interaction with stockpeople does reduce sows’ fear of stockpeople, but does not always confer stress resilence.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Positive Human Contact during Gestation on the Behaviour, Physiology and Reproductive Performance of Sows

Hayes

Hemsworth

Morrison³

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is true for socially housed animals, but also for singly housed animals that have visual or auditory contact with other individuals. Thus, it is worth thinking in very broad terms about an animal's social world and how social cues-both from conspecifics and human care takers-can and will influence animals' decision making, behavior, and welfare [86,87]. Importantly, emotional contagion can be leveraged in beneficial ways.…”

Section: Socialization and Seeding New Cultural Traditionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, informal human-animal interactions may not always confer welfare benefits [191], although playful handling of rats has been shown to reduce the rats' fear of caretakers [192]. It has been shown that the identity and experience of the person providing care can influence an animal's welfare [193][194][195] and a recent study with pigs demonstrated that animals that had seen a stockperson using gentle handling techniques on pen mates were more likely to approach and make contact with the stockperson than pigs who had not received such social information [87]. From this, the authors [87] concluded that "pigs can learn to perceive humans positively through observational social learning" (p. 127).…”

Section: Spontaneous Social Learning Of Unanticipated or Negative Behmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been shown that the identity and experience of the person providing care can influence an animal's welfare [193][194][195] and a recent study with pigs demonstrated that animals that had seen a stockperson using gentle handling techniques on pen mates were more likely to approach and make contact with the stockperson than pigs who had not received such social information [87]. From this, the authors [87] concluded that "pigs can learn to perceive humans positively through observational social learning" (p. 127). Given this, the selection and training of staff is key [196][197][198], although the efficacy of such training depends on how it is administered [199].…”

Section: Spontaneous Social Learning Of Unanticipated or Negative Behmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Leveraging Social Learning to Enhance Captive Animal Care and Welfare

Hopper

2021

JZBG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From ants to zebras, animals are influenced by the behavior of others. At the simplest level, social support can reduce neophobia, increasing animals’ exploration of novel spaces, foods, and other environmental stimuli. Animals can also learn new skills more quickly and more readily after observing others perform them. How then can we apply animals’ proclivity to socially learn to enhance their care and welfare in captive settings? Here, I review the ways in which animals (selectively) use social information, and propose tactics for leveraging that to refine the behavioral management of captive animals: to enhance socialization techniques, enrichment strategies, and training outcomes. It is also important to consider, however, that social learning does not always promote the uniform expression of new behaviors. There are differences in animals’ likelihood to seek out or use socially provided information, driven by characteristics such as species, rank, age, and personality. Additionally, social learning can result in inexact transmission or the transmission of undesirable behaviors. Thus, understanding when, how, and why animals use social information is key to developing effective strategies to improve how we care for animals across settings and, ultimately, enhance captive animal welfare.

show abstract

“…C and +HC litters were allocated to opposite ends of each room in order to minimise any carry-over effects of the positive handling treatment. In particular, it was important to minimise the amount of visual exposure to humans that C litters received through the imposition of the +HC treatment, as fear of humans is reduced in pigs that observe positive handling of other pigs [32]. Thus, in the farrowing crate room where 2 parallel rows of crates were used, non-experimental litters (also from first parity sows) were allocated in between +HC and C litters (Figure 2b).…”

Section: Human Contact Treatment Allocationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Positive Human Contact and Housing Systems Impact the Responses of Piglets to Various Stressors

Hayes

Hemsworth

Morrison³

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This experiment studied the effects of lactation housing systems and human interaction on piglets’ responses to routine stressors. Forty litters of piglets were reared in either a standard farrowing crate (FC) or a loose farrowing and lactation pen (LP; PigSAFE pen) and received either routine contact with humans (C) or regular opportunities for positive human contact (+HC; 3 min of patting, stroking and scratching 5 times/week). Behavioural and physiological responses to routine husbandry procedures, weaning, novelty and humans were studied in addition to effects on piglet growth, injuries and survival. Compared to C piglets, +HC piglets vocalised for shorter durations (p = 0.018) during husbandry procedures and showed a lower intensity of escape behaviour during iron injection (p = 0.042) and oral vaccination (p = 0.026) at 3 d of age, capture at 2 wk of age (p < 0.001), and intramuscular vaccination (p = 0.005) at 3 wk of age. +HC piglets at 2 wk of age were faster than C piglets to approach (p = 0.048) and interact (p = 0.042) with a stationary unfamiliar human. Compared to LP piglets, FC piglets showed a lower intensity of escape behaviour during capture and iron administration by a stockperson at 3 d of age (p = 0.043). FC piglets at 2 wk of age were faster than LP piglets to approach (p = 0.005) and interact (p = 0.027) with a novel object and approach (p = 0.009) and interact (p = 0.008) with an unfamiliar human. FC piglets had fewer injuries than LP piglets at 2 wk of age (p = 0.004). +HC pigs had fewer injuries than C pigs after weaning (p = 0.003). After weaning there were more pigs from LP than FC observed to be upright (both stationary, p = 0.002 and walking, p = 0.024), vocalizing (p = 0.004), nosing another pig (p = 0.035) and nosing the pen floor (p = 0.038). There were no significant effects on neutrophil:lymphocyte ratios or plasma cortisol concentrations 1.5 h after weaning. However, 25 h after weaning +HC pigs had higher haptoglobin concentrations than C pigs (p = 0.002), and C/LP pigs had higher cortisol concentrations than +HC/LP and C/FC pigs (p = 0.012). There were no significant effects on piglet growth, the number of piglets born alive or the number stillborn, however there were more piglets weaned from FC than LP (p = 0.035). The results from this experiment raise questions that require further research on the ability of pigs reared in loose pens to cope with stressors such as exposure to humans, novelty, husbandry procedures and weaning. This experiment also provides evidence that regular positive human interaction reduces pigs’ fear of humans and husbandry procedures imposed by stockpeople. More research is required to determine if any of these effects are sustained long-term.

show abstract

Do Domestic Pigs Acquire a Positive Perception of Humans through Observational Social Learning?

Cited by 13 publications

References 69 publications

Effects of Positive Human Contact during Gestation on the Behaviour, Physiology and Reproductive Performance of Sows

Effects of Positive Human Contact during Gestation on the Behaviour, Physiology and Reproductive Performance of Sows

Leveraging Social Learning to Enhance Captive Animal Care and Welfare

Positive Human Contact and Housing Systems Impact the Responses of Piglets to Various Stressors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About