Cargando…

Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group

Chute (CS) and exit (ES) scores are common subjective methods used to evaluate temperament in cattle production systems. A pen test, which allows behavior to be observed in a non-restrained setting, may also be an effective method to evaluate temperament by allowing more variation among animals to b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Parham, Jamie T, Tanner, Amy E, Blevins, Sarah R, Wahlberg, Mark L, Lewis, Ronald M
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9030122/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143671
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skac040
_version_ 1784692066564964352
author Parham, Jamie T
Tanner, Amy E
Blevins, Sarah R
Wahlberg, Mark L
Lewis, Ronald M
author_facet Parham, Jamie T
Tanner, Amy E
Blevins, Sarah R
Wahlberg, Mark L
Lewis, Ronald M
author_sort Parham, Jamie T
collection PubMed
description Chute (CS) and exit (ES) scores are common subjective methods used to evaluate temperament in cattle production systems. A pen test, which allows behavior to be observed in a non-restrained setting, may also be an effective method to evaluate temperament by allowing more variation among animals to be expressed. The merit of pen scores in assisting producers in evaluating temperament is equivocal. The objectives of this study were to validate the usefulness of a pen score in delineating temperamental cattle and to determine whether these behavioral scores change under repeated and routine management. Over 3 consecutive years, a factorial design of two measurement protocols (frequent [F], infrequent [IN]) and three recording periods was used. The F measurements were collected over 3 consecutive days and IN measurements only on day 1 within a recording period. Each year, 20 mostly Angus commercial Bos taurus heifers were randomly assigned to each protocol. Behavior was measured using a CS, ES, and exit velocity. Body temperature and heart rate also were recorded. A fecal and blood sample were collected and analyzed for levels of various metabolites including glucose concentration and serum cortisol. Following routine handling, each heifers’ response to 30 s of exposure to a human stressor was recorded both individually and in groups of four. An individual (IPS) and group (GPS) pen scores were assigned from 1 (docile) to 6 (aggressive). For all heifers, protocol, event, and their interaction, were compared on the first day of an event. For F heifers, event and day within event were instead used. Body weight was included as a covariate, with sire and year fitted as random effects. Reliability of IPS and GPS were determined using a kappa (K) coefficient. Both IPS and GPS were reliably assigned (K = 0.64 and 0.44 for IPS and GPS, respectively) and positively correlated with body temperature, heart rate, glucose, and serum cortisol (r = 0.28 to 0.37). Furthermore, F heifers acclimated to repeated handling in an individual pen setting (P < 0.05) while acclimation to handling within groups was not evident (P > 0.14). IPS provides a reliable evaluation of temperament in a non-restrained setting that is indicative of an animal’s response to stress and may be useful when attempting to make phenotypic selection decisions. However, temperamental heifers became calmer with repeated gentle handling.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9030122
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90301222022-04-25 Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group Parham, Jamie T Tanner, Amy E Blevins, Sarah R Wahlberg, Mark L Lewis, Ronald M J Anim Sci Animal Behavior and Cognition Chute (CS) and exit (ES) scores are common subjective methods used to evaluate temperament in cattle production systems. A pen test, which allows behavior to be observed in a non-restrained setting, may also be an effective method to evaluate temperament by allowing more variation among animals to be expressed. The merit of pen scores in assisting producers in evaluating temperament is equivocal. The objectives of this study were to validate the usefulness of a pen score in delineating temperamental cattle and to determine whether these behavioral scores change under repeated and routine management. Over 3 consecutive years, a factorial design of two measurement protocols (frequent [F], infrequent [IN]) and three recording periods was used. The F measurements were collected over 3 consecutive days and IN measurements only on day 1 within a recording period. Each year, 20 mostly Angus commercial Bos taurus heifers were randomly assigned to each protocol. Behavior was measured using a CS, ES, and exit velocity. Body temperature and heart rate also were recorded. A fecal and blood sample were collected and analyzed for levels of various metabolites including glucose concentration and serum cortisol. Following routine handling, each heifers’ response to 30 s of exposure to a human stressor was recorded both individually and in groups of four. An individual (IPS) and group (GPS) pen scores were assigned from 1 (docile) to 6 (aggressive). For all heifers, protocol, event, and their interaction, were compared on the first day of an event. For F heifers, event and day within event were instead used. Body weight was included as a covariate, with sire and year fitted as random effects. Reliability of IPS and GPS were determined using a kappa (K) coefficient. Both IPS and GPS were reliably assigned (K = 0.64 and 0.44 for IPS and GPS, respectively) and positively correlated with body temperature, heart rate, glucose, and serum cortisol (r = 0.28 to 0.37). Furthermore, F heifers acclimated to repeated handling in an individual pen setting (P < 0.05) while acclimation to handling within groups was not evident (P > 0.14). IPS provides a reliable evaluation of temperament in a non-restrained setting that is indicative of an animal’s response to stress and may be useful when attempting to make phenotypic selection decisions. However, temperamental heifers became calmer with repeated gentle handling. Oxford University Press 2022-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC9030122/ /pubmed/35143671 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skac040 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society of Animal Science. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Animal Behavior and Cognition
Parham, Jamie T
Tanner, Amy E
Blevins, Sarah R
Wahlberg, Mark L
Lewis, Ronald M
Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group
title Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group
title_full Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group
title_fullStr Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group
title_full_unstemmed Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group
title_short Cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group
title_sort cattle acclimate more substantially to repeated handling when confined individually in a pen than when assessed as a group
topic Animal Behavior and Cognition
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9030122/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35143671
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jas/skac040
work_keys_str_mv AT parhamjamiet cattleacclimatemoresubstantiallytorepeatedhandlingwhenconfinedindividuallyinapenthanwhenassessedasagroup
AT tanneramye cattleacclimatemoresubstantiallytorepeatedhandlingwhenconfinedindividuallyinapenthanwhenassessedasagroup
AT blevinssarahr cattleacclimatemoresubstantiallytorepeatedhandlingwhenconfinedindividuallyinapenthanwhenassessedasagroup
AT wahlbergmarkl cattleacclimatemoresubstantiallytorepeatedhandlingwhenconfinedindividuallyinapenthanwhenassessedasagroup
AT lewisronaldm cattleacclimatemoresubstantiallytorepeatedhandlingwhenconfinedindividuallyinapenthanwhenassessedasagroup