Effects of horn status on behaviour in fattening cattle in the field and during reactivity tests

Reiche, Anna-Maria; Dohme‐Meier, F.; Terlouw, Claudia

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2020.105081

Cited by 10 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A few studies have evaluated behavioral consequences of disbudding after the wounds have healed. Disbudded calves initiated more agonistic body contacts as adults than horned cattle (Knierim et al, 2015;Lutz et al, 2019), although the opposite pattern was reported during a food competition test (Reiche et al, 2020a). Compared to horned cattle, calves disbudded around 2 months of age had lower stress responses to an adrenocorticotropic hormone challenge at 11 months (Reiche et al, 2020b), and spent more time inactive at 9-12 months of age (Reiche et al, 2020a).…”

Section: Disbuddingmentioning

confidence: 88%

“…Compared to horned cattle, calves disbudded around 2 months of age had lower stress responses to an adrenocorticotropic hormone challenge at 11 months (Reiche et al, 2020b), and spent more time inactive at 9-12 months of age (Reiche et al, 2020a). Disbudding also resulted in sex-dependent changes in exploration of a novel object at 10-11 months of age (Reiche et al, 2020a). These behavioral differences were attributed to the presence/absence of horns, but the possibility that nociceptive input from disbudding may have also influenced development of these behaviors deserves consideration.…”

Section: Disbuddingmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Early Life Painful Procedures: Long-Term Consequences and Implications for Farm Animal Welfare

Adcock

2021

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Farm animals routinely undergo painful husbandry procedures early in life, including disbudding and castration in calves and goat kids, tail docking and castration in piglets and lambs, and beak trimming in chicks. In rodents, inflammatory events soon after birth, when physiological systems are developing and sensitive to perturbation, can profoundly alter phenotypic outcomes later in life. This review summarizes the current state of research on long-term phenotypic consequences of neonatal painful procedures in rodents and farm animals, and discusses the implications for farm animal welfare. Rodents exposed to early life inflammation show a hypo-/hyper-responsive profile to pain-, fear-, and anxiety-inducing stimuli, manifesting as an initial attenuation in responses that transitions into hyperresponsivity with increasing age or cumulative stress. Neonatal inflammation also predisposes rodents to cognitive, social, and reproductive deficits, and there is some evidence that adverse effects may be passed to offspring. The outcomes of neonatal inflammation are modulated by injury etiology, age at the time of injury and time of testing, sex, pain management, and rearing environment. Equivalent research examining long-term phenotypic consequences of early life painful procedures in farm animals is greatly lacking, despite obvious implications for welfare and performance. Improved understanding of how these procedures shape phenotypes will inform efforts to mitigate negative outcomes through reduction, replacement, and refinement of current practices.

show abstract

Section: Disbuddingmentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Disbuddingmentioning

confidence: 90%

Early Life Painful Procedures: Long-Term Consequences and Implications for Farm Animal Welfare

Adcock

2021

Front. Anim. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the presence/absence or characteristics of horns were not thought to help predict temperament. There is some evidence that pain associated with disbudding can have an effect on the short-term behavioural responses of animals [ 59 ], and that the consequences of this process may be long-lasting [ 60 ]. Farmers’ perceptions and available evidence raise the need to study how horned and dehorned cattle react to human handling and other fear-generating stimuli in autochthonous breeds.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…is quite clear from behavioural studies [ 61 ], so the lack of consensus among farmers about this particular topic may reflect the heterogeneity of effects they observed, which coincides with contrasting evidences of different studies [ 62 ]. However, it can also be a consequence of the different types of herds on which the farmers’ opinions are based (only horned, only dehorned, or mixed herds), as their previous experiences limit their options to compare and observe the existing effects [ 60 ]. Contrasting opinions on this topic also seem to be mediated by the value that participants assign to horns within their concept of animal’s beauty and of their own self-concept as farmers, aspects common to farmers of different breeds and productive systems [ 19 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting Cattle Temperament in Beef Cow-Calf Systems: Insights from Farmers’ Perceptions about an Autochthonous Breed

Estévez-Moreno

Lama

Villarroel

et al. 2021

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding temperament is an important part of cattle production since undesirable temperament may cause serious problems associated with aggression, maternal care, and human safety. However, little is known about how farmers define or assess temperament, especially in autochthonous cattle breeds. The aim of this study was to explore perceptions of farmers about the temperament of the Pyrenean cattle breed with special attention to beef cow-calf systems in Spain. The methodology used to obtain the information was focus group discussions (FGD). Farmers defined temperament as a behavioural response to challenging situations imposed by human handling. Specific terms used were related to active or passive reactions to fear (e.g., “strong”, “aggressive”, “nervous”, “fearful”). The speed of response to stimuli was also important. Female temperament was thought to become more docile with age while bull temperament was more variable. Maternal aggressiveness was highlighted as a potential human safety problem, but also desirable in an extensively bred animal who may need to defend calves against predators. Anatomical characteristics were seen as unreliable predictors of temperament, while behavioural indicators were more widely used, such as “alertness”, which was a general trait of the breed, and “gaze”, which, when associated with an alert expression, suggests a potential threat. Sensory acuity, such as sight and smell, were thought to be related with temperament in some FGDs but there was no overall agreement as to whether different behavioural responses were due to differences in sensory acuity. The results from the study could be useful during training programs or in the development of new genetic selection schemes and evaluation protocols involving cattle temperament.

show abstract

“…Consequently, there seems to have been a growing separation between research focused on positive indicators of welfare (e.g., Mattiello et al, 2019;Ocepek et al, 2020) and those examining negative indicators (e.g., Bravo et al, 2019;Reiche et al, 2020). To support animal welfare more effectively, there is arguably a need for these perspectives to be integrated for the evaluation of animal welfare (Stokes et al, 2020).…”

Section: 'Healthy and Happy': Integrating Negative And Positive Aspects Of Welfarementioning

confidence: 99%

Positive Welfare in Science and Society: Differences, Similarities and Synergies

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Societal and scientific perspectives of animal welfare have an interconnected history. However, they have also, somewhat, evolved separately with scientific perspectives often focusing on specific aspects or indicators of animal welfare and societal perspectives typically taking a broader and more ethically oriented view of welfare. In this conceptual paper, we examine the similarities and differences between scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare and examine what they may mean for future discussions of animal welfare considered as a whole. Reviewing published studies in the field we find that (UK and Republic of Ireland) farmers and (UK) members of the public (i.e., society) typically consider both negatives (i.e., minimising harms) and positives (i.e., promoting positive experiences) within the envelope of positive welfare and prioritise welfare needs according to the specific context or situation an animal is in. However, little consideration of a whole life perspective (e.g., the balance of positive and negative experiences across an animal's lifetime) is evident in these societal perspectives. We highlight how addressing these disparities, by simultaneously considering scientific and societal perspectives of positive welfare, provides an opportunity to more fully incorporate positive welfare within a comprehensive understanding of animal welfare. We suggest that a consideration of both scientific and societal perspectives points to an approach to welfare which accounts for both positive and negative experiences, prioritises them (e.g., by seeing positive experiences as dependent on basic animal needs being fulfilled), and considers the balance of positives and negatives over the lifetime of the animals. We expand on this view and conclude with its potential implications for future development of how to understand and assess animal welfare.

show abstract

Effects of horn status on behaviour in fattening cattle in the field and during reactivity tests

Cited by 10 publications

References 29 publications

Early Life Painful Procedures: Long-Term Consequences and Implications for Farm Animal Welfare

Early Life Painful Procedures: Long-Term Consequences and Implications for Farm Animal Welfare

Revisiting Cattle Temperament in Beef Cow-Calf Systems: Insights from Farmers’ Perceptions about an Autochthonous Breed

Positive Welfare in Science and Society: Differences, Similarities and Synergies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About