Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
JASBB Baner text

Vol. 39 No. 1 (2023)

Articles

Impact of socialization on the possibility to conduct behavioral tests in sheep

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24326/jasbb.2023.5082
Submitted: February 16, 2023
Published: 2023-05-18

Abstract

The aim of the study was to assess the impact of socialization with humans on the possibility to conduct tests evaluating problem-solving in sheep. The research included 30 Świniarka sheep aged from 2 to 8 years. The sheep were kept in the barn-pasture system. The observations included three trials carried out on three consecutive days for each sheep. The behavior of the sheep, i.e. exploration and approach to equipment elements of the test arena, was analyzed. The experiment was conducted on groups of sheep with low (G1) and high (G2) levels of socialization. The study showed that the test environment was challenging for the G1 sheep, so they were unable to complete the task successfully.

References

  1. Ashton B.J., Ridley A.R., Edwards E.K., Thornton A., 2018. Cognititve performance is linked to group size and affects fitness in Australian magpies. Nature 554(7692), 364–367. https://doi.org.10.1038/nature25503 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature25503
  2. Baragli P., Vitale V., Paoletti E., Sighieri C., Reddon A.R., 2011. Detour behaviour in horses (Equus caballus). J Ethol. 29, 227–234. https://doi.org.10.1007/s10164-010-0246-9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10164-010-0246-9
  3. Briefer E.F., Haque S., Baciadonna L., McElligott A.G., 2014. Goats excel at learning and remem-bering a highly novel cognitive task. Front Zool. 11(20). https://doi.org/10.1186/1742- DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-11-20
  4. -9994-11-20
  5. Coulon M., Nowak R., Peyrat J., Chandèze H., Boissy A., Boivin X., 2015. Do lambs perceive regular human stroking as pleasant? Behavior and heart rate variability analyses. PLoS ONE. 10(2), e0118617. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118617 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0118617
  6. Destrez A., Coulon M., Deiss V., Delval E., Boissy A., Boivin X., 2013. The valence of the long-lasting emotional experiences with various handlers modulates discrimination and generalization of individual humans in sheep. J. Anim. Sci. 91, 5418–5426. https://doi.org/ 10.2527/jas.2012-5654 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2012-5654
  7. Doyle R.E., 2017. 4 – Sheep cognition and its implications for welfare. Advances in Sheep Welfare. Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition. Woodhead Publishing, 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100718-1.00004-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-100718-1.00004-2
  8. Dwyer C.M., 2009. Welfare of sheep: providing for welfare in an extensive environment. Small Rumin. Res. 86, 14–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2009.09.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smallrumres.2009.09.010
  9. Guesdon V., Nowak R., Meurisse M., Boivin X., Cornilleau F., Chaillou E., Lévy F., 2016. Behavioral evidence of heterospecific bonding between the lamb and the human caregiver and mapping of associated brain network. Psychoneuroendocrinology 71, 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.05.020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.05.020
  10. van Horik J.O., Gangley E.J.G., Whiteside M.A., Madden J.R., 2017. Differential participation in cognitive tests is driven by personality, sex, body condition and experience. Behav. Processes. 134, 22–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2016.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beproc.2016.07.001
  11. Johnson-Ulrich L., Holekamp K.E., Hambrick D.Z., 2020. Innovative problem-solving in wild hyenas is reliable across time and context. Sci. Rep. 10, 13000. https://doi.org/10.1038/ s41598-020-69953-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69953-5
  12. Langbein J., Nürnberg G., Manteuffel G. 2004. Visual discrimination in learning in dwarf goats and associated changes in heart rate and heart rate variability. Physiol. Behav. 82, 601–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2004.05.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2004.05.007
  13. Mastellone V., Scandurra A., D’Aniello B., Nawroth C., Saggese F., Silvestre P., Lombardi P., 2020. Long-term socialization with humans affects human-directed behavior in goats. Animals 10, 578. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10040578 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10040578
  14. Meehan C.L., Mench J.A., 2007. The challenge of challenge: can problem solving opportunities enhance animal welfare? App. Anim. Behav. Sci. 102, 246–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.applanim.2006.05.031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2006.05.031
  15. Mendl M.,1999. Performing under pressure: stress and cognitive function. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 65, 221–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00088-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00088-X
  16. Morton A.J., Avanzo L., 2011. Executive decision-making in the domestic sheep. PLoS ONE, 6(1), e15752. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015752 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015752
  17. Nowak R., Boivin X., 2015. Filial attachement in sheep: similarities and differences between ewe-lamb and human-lamb relationships. App. Anim. Behav. Sci. 164, 12–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.09.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2014.09.013
  18. Rosenberger K., Simmler M., Langbein J., Keil N., Nawroth C., 2021. Performance of goats in a detour and a problem-solving test following long-term cognitive test exposure. R. Soc. Open Sci. 8, 210656.8. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210656 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.210656
  19. Rowell M.K., Pillay N., Rymer T.L. 2021. Problem solving in animals: Proposal for an ontogenetic perspective. Animals 11, 866. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11030866 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ani11030866
  20. Regulation of the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development dated December 14, 2016 on the minimum requirements to apply to the institution and the minimum requirements for the care of animals kept at the institution (Dz.U. 2016 poz. 2139) [Rozporządzenie Ministra Rolnictwa i Rozwoju Wsi z dnia 14 grudnia 2016 r. w sprawie minimalnych wymagań, jakie powinien spełniać ośrodek, oraz minimalnych wymagań w zakresie opieki nad zwierzętami utrzymywanymi w ośrodku (Dz.U. 2016 poz. 2139)].
  21. Schwabe L., Wolf O.T., Oitzl M.S., 2010. Memory formation under stress: quantity and quality. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 34, 584–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.11.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.11.015
  22. Siebert K., Langebein J., Schön P.-C., Tuchscherer A., Puppe B., 2011. Degree of social isolation affects behavioural and vocal response patterns in dwarf goats (Capra hircus). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 131, 53–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2011.01.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applanim.2011.01.003
  23. Sokołowski J., Janicka K., Rozempolska-Rucińska I., 2022. Wpływ poziomu strachu na behawior pokarmowy owiec. Med. Weter. 78(11), 577–580. http://dx.doi.org/10.21521/mw.6693 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21521/mw.6693
  24. Valenchon M., Lévy F., Prunier A., Moussu C., Calandreau L., Lansade L., 2013. Stress modulates instrumental learning performances in horses (Equus caballus) in interaction with temperament. PLos ONE 8(4), e62324. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062324 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0062324
  25. Wat K.K.Y., Banks P.B., McArthur C., 2020. Linking animal personality to problem-solving performance in urban common brushtail possums. Anim. Behav. 162, 35–45. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.anbehav.2020.01.013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2020.01.013
  26. Zulkifli I., 2013. Review of human-animal interactions and their impact on animal productivity and welfare. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 4, 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/2049-1891-4-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/2049-1891-4-25

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.