Hostname: page-component-669899f699-7xsfk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-28T17:20:43.378Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of gentle interactions on the relationship with humans and on stress-related parameters in group-housed calves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2023

S Lürzel ,
I Windschnurer ,
A Futschik ,
R Palme  and
S Waiblinger
S Lürzel*
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Welfare, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
I Windschnurer
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Welfare, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
A Futschik
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Statistics, JK University Linz, Altenberger Str 69, 4040 Linz, Austria
R Palme
Affiliation:
Unit of Physiology, Pathophysiology and Experimental Endocrinology, Department for Biomedical Sciences, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
S Waiblinger
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Husbandry and Animal Welfare, Department for Farm Animals and Veterinary Public Health, University of Veterinary Medicine, Vienna, Veterinärplatz 1, 1210 Vienna, Austria
*
* Contact for correspondence and requests for reprints: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although the relationship between farm animals and humans has strong implications for animal welfare and productivity, there have been few experimental studies on the influence of gentle interactions in group-housed calves. In the present study, Austrian Simmental calves were housed in groups of four under standard management conditions. Fourteen calves experienced 40 min of additional gentle interactions in the form of stroking and gentle talking during the first four weeks of life, whereas the remaining eleven calves did not. The animals’ fear of humans was measured by avoidance distance tests on 33 and 76 days of age and by an arena test that comprised three phases — isolation, presence of a human, isolation — at 34 days of age. The very low avoidance distances did not differ significantly between the groups. In the arena test, there was less behaviour indicative of stress in the presence of the experimenter compared with the isolation phases. Heart-rate measurements showed a corresponding pattern. Control calves showed more tail-flicking than stroked calves and had higher concentrations of salivary cortisol before and after the test. There were no other significant differences between the groups. The minor number of behavioural differences may result from the control animals’ good relationship with humans, ie there is a ceiling effect. If the general contact between stockpeople and calves is gentle and negative experiences are minimised, it is possible to achieve a good calf-human relationship without additional efforts.

Keywords

animal welfareavoidance distancecalvescortisolheart ratehuman-animal relationship
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , November 2015 , pp. 475 - 484
Copyright
© 2015 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Balcombe, J 2009 Animal pleasure and its moral significance. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 118: 208–216. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.02.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bayvel, A, Diesch, T and Cross, N 2012 Animal welfare: a com-plex international public policy issue: economic, policy, societal, cultural and other drivers and constraints. A 20-year internation-al perspective. Animal Welfare 21: 11–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.7120/096272812X13345905673485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bertenshaw, C and Rowlinson, P 2008 Exploring heifers’ per-ception of ‘positive’ treatment through their motivation to pursue a retreated human. Animal Welfare 17: 313–319Google Scholar
Blanco, M, Casasús, I and Palacio, J 2009 Effect of age at weaning on the physiological stress response and temperament of two beef cattle breeds. Animal 3: 108–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1751731108002978CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boissy, A, Manteuffel, G, Jensen, MB, Moe, RO, Spruijt, B, Keeling, LJ, Winckler, C, Forkman, B, Dimitrov, I, Langbein, J, Bakken, M, Veissier, I and Aubert, A 2007 Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare. Physiology & Behavior 92: 375–397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.phys-beh.2007.02.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boivin, X, Garel, JP, Durier, C and Le Neindre, P 1998 Is gen-tling by people rewarding for beef calves? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 61: 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00170-1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boivin, X, Tournadre, H and Le Neindre, P 2000 Hand-feeding and gentling influence early-weaned lambs’ attachment responses to their stockperson. Journal of Animal Science 78: 879–884CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buller, H 2013 Animal welfare: from production to consumption. In: Blokhuis, HJ, Miele, M, Veissier, I and Jones, RB (eds) Improving Farm Animal Welfare - Science and Society Working Together: The Welfare Quality approach pp 49–69. Wageningen Academic Publishers: Wageningen, The Netherlands. http://dx.doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-770-7_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chesterton, RN, Pfeiffer, DU, Morris, RS and Tanner, CM 1989 Environmental and behavioral factors affecting the preva-lence of foot lameness in New Zealand dairy herds: a case-con-trol study. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 37: 135–142. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00480169.1989.35587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duve, L, Weary, D, Halekoh, U and Jensen, M 2012 The effects of social contact and milk allowance on responses to handling, play, and social behavior in young dairy calves. Journal of Dairy Science 95:6571–6581. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2011-5170CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Estep, DQ and Hetts, S 1992 Interactions, relationships and bonds: the conceptual basis for scientist-animal relations. In: Davis, H and Balfour, AD (eds) The Inevitable Bond: Examining Scientist-Animal Interactions pp 6–26. CAB International: Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
European Council 2008 Council Directive 2008/119/EC of 18 December 2008 laying down minimum standards for the protection of calves (codified version). Official Journal of the European Union, L10/7, 15.1.2009. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT?uri=CELEX:32008L0119Google Scholar
Green, T and Mellor, D 2011 Extending ideas about animal wel-fare assessment to include ‘quality of life’ and related concepts. New Zealand Veterinary Journal 59: 263–271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00480169.2011.610283Google Scholar
Held, SD and Špinka, M 2011 Animal play and animal welfare. Animal Behaviour 81: 891–899. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.anbe-hav.2011.01.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemsworth, PH, Coleman, GJ, Barnett, JL and Borg, S 2000 Relationships between human-animal interactions and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 78: 2821–2831Google ScholarPubMed
Hemsworth, PH, Coleman, GJ, Barnett, JL, Borg, S and Dowling, S 2002 The effects of cognitive behavioral intervention on the attitude and behavior of stockpersons and the behavior and productivity of commercial dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 80: 68–78CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Herskin, MS, Ladewig, J and Arendt-Nielsen, L 2009 Measuring cutaneous thermal nociception in group-housed pigs using laser technique: Effects of laser power output. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 118: 144–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.appla-nim.2009.02.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herskin, MS, Müller, R, Schrader, L and Ladewig, J 2003 A laser-based method to measure thermal nociception in dairy cows: Short-term repeatability and effects of power output and skin condition. Journal of Animal Science 81: 945–954CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ivemeyer, S, Knierim, U and Waiblinger, S 2011 Effect of human-animal relationship and management on udder health in Swiss dairy herds. Journal of Dairy Science 94: 5890–5902. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2010-4048CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jago, JG, Krohn, CC and Matthews, LR 1999 The influence of feeding and handling on the development of the human-animal interactions in young cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62:137–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00219-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, MB and Kyhn, R 2000 Play behaviour in group-housed dairy calves, the effect of space allowance. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 67: 35–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00113-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koolhaas, J, Bartolomucci, A, Buwalda, B, de Boer, S, Fluegge, G, Korte, S, Meerlo, P, Murison, R, Olivier, B, Palanza, P, Richter-Levin, G, Sgoifo, A, Steimer, T, Stiedl, O, van Dijk, G, Woehr, M and Fuchs, E 2011 Stress revisited: A critical evaluation of the stress concept. Neuroscience and biobe-havioral reviews 35: 1291–1301. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neubio-rev.2011.02.003CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Krachun, C, Rushen, J and de Passillé, AM 2010 Play behav-iour in dairy calves is reduced by weaning and by a low energy intake. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 122: 71–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2009.12.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krohn, CC, Boivin, X and Jago, JG 2003 The presence of the dam during handling prevents the socialization of young calves to humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 80: 263–275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00230-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lensink, BJ, Boivin, X, Pradel, P, Le Neindre, P and Veissier, I 2000 Reducing veal calves’ reactivity to people by providing additional human contact. Journal of Animal Science 78: 1213–1218CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lensink, BJ, Raussi, S, Boivin, X, Pyykkonen, M and Veissier, I 2001 Reactions of calves to handling depend on housing condition and previous experience with humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 70:187–199. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00152-0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leruste, H, Bokkers, EAM, Heutinck, LFM, Wolthuis-Fillerup, M, van der Werf, JTN, Brscic, M, Cozzi, G, Engel, B, van Reenen, CG and Lensink, BJ 2012 Evaluation of on-farm veal calves’ responses to unfamiliar humans and potential influencing factors. Animal 6: 2003–2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1751731112001346CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liu, D, Diorio, J, Tannenbaum, B, Caldji, C, Francis, D, Freedman, A, Sharma, S, Pearson, D, Plotsky, PM and Meaney, MJ 1997 Maternal care, hippocampal glucocorticoid recep-tors, and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal responses to stress. Science 277: 1659–1662. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5332.1659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mazurek, M, McGee, M, Crowe, MA, Prendiville, DJ, Boivin, X and Earley, B 2011 Consistency and stability of behavioural fear responses of heifers to different fear-eliciting situations involving humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 131: 21–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2011.01.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphey, RM, Duarte, FAM and Penedo, MCT 1980 Approachability of bovine cattle in pastures - breed comparisons and a breed X treatment analysis. Behavior Genetics 10: 171–181. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01066267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphey, RM, Duarte, FAM and Penedo, MCT 1981 Responses of cattle to humans in open spaces - breed compar-isons and approach-avoidance relationships. Behavior Genetics 11:37–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01065826Google ScholarPubMed
Napolitano, F, Knierim, U, Grasso, F and De Rosa, G 2009 Positive indicators of cattle welfare and their applicability to on-farm protocols. Italian Journal of Animal Science 8: 355–365. http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Orbán, M, Gaál, KK, Pajor, F, Szentléleki, A, Póti, P, Tőzsér, J and Gulyás, L 2011 Effect of temperament of Jersey and Holstein Friesian cows on milk production traits and somatic cell count. Archiv für Tierzucht - Archives of Animal Breeding 54: 594–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palme, R and Möstl, E 1997 Measurement of cortisol metabo-lites in faeces of sheep as a parameter of cortisol concentration in blood. Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde - International Journal of Mammalian Biology 62(S2): 192–197.Google Scholar
Probst, JK, Neff, AS, Leiber, F, Kreuzer, M and Hillmann, E 2012 Gentle touching in early life reduces avoidance distance and slaughter stress in beef cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 139: 42–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2012.03.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raussi, S 2003 Human-cattle interactions in group housing. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 80: 245–262. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00213-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Raussi, S, Lensink, BJ, Boissy, A, Pyykkonen, M and Veissier, I 2003 The effect of contact with conspecifics and humans on calves’ behaviour and stress responses. Animal Welfare 12: 191–203Google Scholar
Reinhardt, C, Reinhardt, A and Reinhardt, V 1986 Social behaviour and reproductive performance in semi-wild Scottish Highland cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15: 125–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0168-1591(86)90058-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushen, J, Taylor, AA and de Passillé, AM 1999 Domestic ani-mal's fear of humans and its effect on their welfare. Cahiers Agricultures 8: 461–470Google Scholar
Schmied, C, Boivin, X, Scala, S and Waiblinger, S 2010 Effect of previous stroking on reactions to a veterinary procedure: Behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows. Interaction Studies 11: 467–481. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/is.11.3.08schCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmied, C, Boivin, X and Waiblinger, S 2008a Stroking dif-ferent body regions of dairy cows: Effects on avoidance and approach behavior toward humans. Journal of Dairy Science 91:596–605. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2007-0360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmied, C, Waiblinger, S, Scharl, T, Leisch, F and Boivin, X 2008b Stroking of different body regions by a human: Effects on behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 109: 25–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2007.01.013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, KM, Molenda-Figueira, HA and Sisk, CL 2009 Back to the future: the organisational-activational hypothesis adapted to puberty and adolescence. Hormones and Behaviour 55: 597–604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2009.03.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schütz, K, Hawke, M, Waas, J, McLeay, L, Bokkers, E, van Reenen, C, Webster, J and Stewart, M 2012 Effects of human handling during early rearing on the behaviour of dairy calves. Animal Welfare 21: 19–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.7120/096272812799129411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, M, Shepherd, H, Webster, J, Waas, J, McLeay, L and Schütz, K 2013 Effect of previous handling experiences on responses of dairy calves to routine husbandry procedures. Animal 7: 828–833. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S175173111200225XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sylvester, SP, Stafford, KJ, Mellor, DJ, Bruce, RA and Ward, RN 2004 Behavioural responses of calves to amputation dehorning with and without local anaesthesia. Australian Veterinary Journal 82: 697–700. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-0813.2004.tb12162.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
von Borstel, UU, Duncan, IJH, Shoveller, AK, Merkies, K, Keeling, LJ and Millman, ST 2009 Impact of riding in a coercive-ly obtained Rollkur posture on welfare and fear of performance horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 116: 228–236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2008.10.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagner, K, Barth, K, Hillmann, E, Palme, R, Futschik, A and Waiblinger, S 2013 Mother rearing of dairy calves: Reactions to isolation and to confrontation with an unfamiliar conspecific in a new environment. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 147: 43–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2013.04.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S 2010 Inerazioni uomo-animale e benessere ani-male. In: Biancifiori, F (ed) Benessere Animale pp 95–129. Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell’Umbria e delle Marche Editore: Perugia, Italy. [Title translation: Animal welfare]Google Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Boivin, X, Pedersen, V, Tosi, MV, Janczak, AM, Visser, EK and Jones, RB 2006 Assessing the human-ani-mal relationship in farmed species: A critical review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 101: 185–242. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C and Coleman, GJ 2002 The relation-ship between attitudes, personal characteristics and behaviour of stockpeople and subsequent behaviour and production of dairy cows. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 79: 195–219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00155-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waiblinger, S, Menke, C, Korff, J and Bucher, A 2004 Previous handling and gentle interactions affect behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows during a veterinary procedure. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 85: 31–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.app-lanim.2003.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windschnurer, I, Barth, K and Waiblinger, S 2009 Can stroking during milking decrease avoidance distances of cows towards humans? Animal Welfare 18: 507–513Google Scholar