Measuring motivation for alfalfa hay in feedlot cattle using voluntary interaction with an aversive stimulus

Coon, Rachael E.; Tucker, Cassandra B.

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2024.106165

Cited by 2 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This may be particularly salient for this population, where before the start of the experiment, all animals were administered Revalor-S, an implant designed to increase feed efficiency and known to stimulate greater intake ( Hermesmeyer et al., 2000 ). These factors, in combination with the highly palatable and calorically dense TMR, could explain the contrafreeloading TMR cattle exhibited in both this experiment and a previous study ( Coon and Tucker, 2024a ). There are more easily fermentable carbohydrates in the TMR than the SG and sugar has been shown to promote addictive-like behaviors in rodents ( Avena et al., 2005 ; Wei et al., 2021 ), although it has not been studied in this context in cattle.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 61%

“…There is also evidence that cattle will ingest more corn silage when the components of the diet are offered instead of as a TMR; finishing cattle consumed approximately 1.7 and 1.3 kg/24 h of silage ( Moya et al., 2011 , 2014 ), versus 0.9 kg offered in the TMR. When the latter results are combined with the previous research demonstrating high motivation for Sudan grass hay in finishing cattle ( Van Os et al., 2018 ) and the weak evidence for higher motivation for alfalfa hay than TMR ( Coon and Tucker, 2024a ), it seems unlikely that the 11% forage inclusion was adequate, especially in light of widespread low reticulorumen pH.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…Animals pushed against the barrier with their muzzles which would rise out of their way, allowing the animal to eat freely from the bin. The training procedures are described in Coon and Tucker (2024a) . Cattle were not enrolled in the study until all four animals in the pen were fully trained.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adding to this uncertainty is the mixed evidence that cattle will choose to consume forage when fed high-concentrate diets. Feedlot cattle thwarted from accessing additional beardless wheat hay show equal or less interest in it compared to those prevented from accessing more finisher (82:18, concentrate:forage; Coon and Tucker, 2023a ), and there is limited evidence that these animals were more motivated to access alfalfa hay than additional finisher behind an electrified barrier ( Coon and Tucker, 2024a ). When offered chopped straw separately versus as a total mixed ration ( TMR ), finishing cattle eat less straw than what was fed in the TMR (8% vs. 15%, respectively).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have previously measured finishing cattle motivation for alfalfa hay using an electrified barrier ( Coon and Tucker, 2024a ) and found that this approach distinguishes between the motivation to access a food resource versus nothing. In this work, we also found that finishing cattle were either equally or only slightly more motivated to access alfalfa compared to an additional offering of the TMR they had also been provided ad libitum, for free.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Cattle are more motivated for a high-concentrate diet than Sudan grass hay, despite low reticulorumen pH

Coon,

Tucker

2024

Journal of Animal Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sub-acute ruminal acidosis (SARA) is characterized by chronic low ruminal pH, occurs for feedlot cattle fed high-concentrate diets. Forages slow digestion and reduce acid production. We aimed to assess how motivated finishing cattle are to access forage (Sudan grass hay, SG) via their willingness to interact with an electrified barrier. Reticulorumen pH was measured to relate the results with digestive health. Twenty-eight animals fed a high-concentrate ration ad-libitum had access to 4 L of one of two treatments (n=14/treatment) fed 1x/d behind a barrier: 1) SG, or 2) an additional offering of the normal ration (TMR). To access a treatment, the steer voluntarily pushed his muzzle against an electrified barrier. The electrical current was increased exponentially every 24 h (0, 156, 312, 625, 1250, 2500, 5000 µA) until the animal ceased accessing it. Visits to the treatment were recorded continuously 24 h/d and reticulorumen pH was measured every 10 min. Rumen pH averaged 3.0±1.2 h/d for SG animals and 2.3±0.9 h/d for TMR animals, durations which meet the criterion for SARA. However, animals with access to SG were less likely to advance to the next current than TMR animals (P<0.01) and were approximately 3x less willing to interact with higher currents than TMR (mean maximum current touched: 469±169 and 1380±254 µA, respectively, mean±SE, P=0.01). Lower motivation to access SG was further demonstrated through fewer visits to the SG (2.4±0.4 vs 5.3±0.6 #/d, P<0.01), and less SG consumed than TMR (32.0±0.1 vs 74.0±0.0 %/d, P<0.01, measured as % due to weight differences of SG and TMR). Overall, finishing cattle valued the TMR more than SG, likely because of differences in the quantity offered, palatability, and familiarity. When rumen health was considered, SG animals visited more often (r=0.5, P=0.09) and showed fewer failed attempts (r=-0.5, P=0.06) to access forage as the severity and duration of pH depression below 5.6, for example, increased. No measures of treatment use were related to pH depression for TMR animals (P≥0.31). These findings provide evidence that cattle are motivated for Sudan grass hay when experiencing chronic low reticulorumen pH. However, they also contribute to the mixed evidence about motivation for forage in this life stage, because, overall TMR was valued more highly than SG. Despite widespread pH depression, TMR cattle contrafreeloaded for additional concentrate, demonstrating unexpectedly high motivation for this resource.

show abstract