The behavioural and physiological responses of dairy heifers to tape-recorded milking facility noise with and without a pre-treatment adaptation phase

Arnold, Naomi A.; Ng, Kim T.; Hemsworth, P.H.

doi:10.1016/j.applanim.2006.07.004

Cited by 33 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The shouting handler in the earlier study moved repeatedly between the front and side of each cow, an action that perhaps elicited additional fear (Waiblinger et al, 2006). Other relevant differences may have included the shouting volumes (decibel levels were not recorded in either study) or the degree of cattle habituation to similar sounds during regular handling (Arnold et al, 2007). Overall, we could not determine whether the emotional valence cattle associated with different spray flow rates was negative, or merely less positive than that associated with feed.…”

Section: Transit Time and Handling Effort To Approach Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Sprinkler flow rate affects dairy cattle avoidance of spray to the head, but not overall, in an aversion race

Chen

Schütz

Tucker

2016

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spraying cattle with water elicits behavioral responses ranging from willing use to avoidance of wetting the head or entire body. This variation may be partly explained by sprinkler flow rate, as higher flow rates result in greater heat abatement and spray impact. An aversion race can be used to evaluate the emotional valence cows associate with treatments, based on the prediction that they will approach negative (vs. positive) stimuli more slowly and require greater pressure from a handler. Our objective was to evaluate how heat load affects the degree to which dairy cattle show reluctance to approach sprinklers with different flow rates in an aversion race. We compared unsprayed treatments (n = 8 with feed, n = 16 without) to 0.4 L/min (n = 14) and 4.5 L/min (n = 17) sprinklers, which differed eight-fold in spray impact (1.1 vs. 8.9 kPa, respectively). Over 10 trials, cows were required to approach treatments in a covered, narrow raceway (average outdoor air temperature, mean ± SD, 31 ± 3.8°C). We compared time to complete the race (transit time), the pressure handlers applied, and head posture. Overall, handlers applied pressure half as often when feed was offered but there were no other treatment differences in handling pressure or transit time. Thus, we excluded the feed treatment when examining interactions with heat load and sprinkler flow rate. In warmer weather, transit time increased (by 13 s per 10°C increase). As their respiration rate increased, unsprayed cows moved more slowly (by 7 s per 10 breaths/min increase), whereas sprayed cows did not. Handling pressure was not affected by heat load or spray application, but head posture depended on sprinkler flow rate. When cows approached 4.5 L/min, they lowered their heads nearly five times as often compared to 0.4 L/min or no spray (proportion of trials ± SE, 0.81 ± 0.05, 0.17 ± 0.06, and 0.15 ± 0.05, respectively). This may have been an attempt to reduce exposure of sensitive body parts to higher-impact spray. Indeed, when we applied von Frey monofilaments to the ear and shoulder (n = 56), the ear had a lower response threshold (greater sensitivity) than the shoulder [mean (95% confidence interval), 0.2 (0.1 to 0.4) vs. 1.2 (0.5 to 2.5) g of force, respectively, back transformed from natural log values]. In conclusion, each measure provided different insights about reluctance to approach treatments. Transit time increased in response to heat load rather than aversion. Handling pressure reflected willingness, as it was needed less often when cows were offered a feed reward, but this measure did not differ among sprinkler treatments. Therefore, although cows lowered their heads to avoid exposing sensitive areas to higher-impact spray, they did not show overall aversion to this type of spray.

show abstract

Section: Transit Time and Handling Effort To Approach Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Sprinkler flow rate affects dairy cattle avoidance of spray to the head, but not overall, in an aversion race

Chen

Schütz

Tucker

2016

Applied Animal Behaviour Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Noise is described as an acute, chronic or intermittent sound [ 1 ], which can act as a potential stressor in farmed species such as pigs [ 2 ], [ 3 ], horses [ 4 ], goats [ 5 ],[ 6 ] and cattle [ 1 ],[ 7 ], [ 8 ], [ 9 ]. In piglets, Talling and colleagues [ 1 ] found that, within 15 min of acute exposures to various noise stimuli at 80–97 dB once per week over a total of 4 weeks, initial increase in heart rate and locomotion indicated an activation of the pigs’ defence mechanisms, followed by habituation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Bells Affect Behaviour and Heart Rate Variability in Grazing Dairy Cows?

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In alpine regions cows are often equipped with bells. The present study investigated the impact of wearing a bell on behaviour and heart rate variability in dairy cows. Nineteen non-lactating Brown-Swiss cows with bell experience were assigned to three different treatments. For 3 days each, cows were equipped with no bell (control), with a bell with inactivated clapper (silent bell) or with a functional bell (functional bell). The bells weighed 5.5 kg and had frequencies between 532 Hz and 2.8 kHz and amplitudes between 90 and 113 dB at a distance of 20 cm. Data were collected on either the first and third or on all 3 days of each treatment. Whereas duration of rumination was reduced with a functional bell and a silent bell compared with no bell, feeding duration was reduced with a silent bell and was intermediate with a functional bell. Head movements were reduced when wearing a silent bell compared with no bell and tended to be reduced when wearing a functional compared to no bell. With a functional bell, lying duration was reduced by almost 4 hours on the third day of treatment compared with the first day with a functional bell and compared with no bell or a silent bell. All additional behavioural measures are consistent with the hypothesis of a restriction in the behaviour of the cows wearing bells, although this pattern did not reach significance. There was no treatment effect on heart rate variability, suggesting that the bells did not affect vago-sympathetic balance. An effect of experimental day was found for only 1 out of 10 behavioural parameters, as shown by a decrease in lying with a functional bell on day 3. The results indicate behavioural changes in the cows wearing a bell over 3 days, without indication of habituation to the bell. Altogether, the behavioural changes suggest that the behaviour of the cows was disturbed by wearing a bell. If long-lasting, these effects may have implications for animal welfare.

show abstract

“…El ruido se puede considerar como un factor estresante si ocurre donde se encuentran los animales, afectando su comportamiento y niveles productivos o si induce cambios fisiológicos (Ames y Arehart, 1972). Específicamente, en la ganadería de leche se han realizado algunos ensayos para evaluar el efecto del ruido en la respuesta comportamental de los animales encontrando que las novillas expuestas al ruido de las instalaciones comerciales de ordeño muestran comportamientos de escape que se consideran como una respuesta de miedo (Arnold et al, 2007). Sin embargo, los estudios en búsqueda de la relación entre el ruido y la productividad; además de la calidad de leche, son muy limitados.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Niveles de ruido durante el ordeño de lecherías con sistemas mecánicos del trópico alto colombiano y su efecto en la calidad de la leche y el bienestar animal

Castro¹,

López²,

Castañeda³

et al. 2019

Rev. investig. vet. Perú

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

El objetivo del trabajo fue determinar los niveles de ruido durante el ordeño de vacasen sistemas de ordeño mecánico (fijo y móvil) y su relación con el bienestar animal y lacalidad de la leche. Los niveles de ruido se midieron en ocho granjas ubicadas en municipiosde la Sabana de Bogotá. La exposición al ruido de las vacas se midió en la sala deordeño (RUME), durante la parada en el área antes de la sala de ordeño (RUIN) y al finaldel ordeño, con el equipo apagado (RUFI). Independientemente del tipo de ordeño, losordeños fueron clasificados según el nivel de ruido como ordeño ruidoso (OR) y ordeñocon ruido tolerable (OT). Los grupos se compararon en relación con la producción,composición y calidad de la leche, así como con los comportamientos asociados al estrés.Se encontraron diferencias significativas para el recuento de células somáticas y el númerode bacterias mesófilas (p<0.05) siendo mayor en los ordeños denominados ruidosos.

show abstract

The behavioural and physiological responses of dairy heifers to tape-recorded milking facility noise with and without a pre-treatment adaptation phase

Cited by 33 publications

References 16 publications

Sprinkler flow rate affects dairy cattle avoidance of spray to the head, but not overall, in an aversion race

Sprinkler flow rate affects dairy cattle avoidance of spray to the head, but not overall, in an aversion race

Do Bells Affect Behaviour and Heart Rate Variability in Grazing Dairy Cows?

Niveles de ruido durante el ordeño de lecherías con sistemas mecánicos del trópico alto colombiano y su efecto en la calidad de la leche y el bienestar animal

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About