AgResearch Ltd, Ruakura Research Centre, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Animal. 2013 May;7(5):828-33. doi: 10.1017/S175173111200225X. Epub 2012 Dec 6.
The nature of human-animal interactions is an important factor contributing to animal welfare and productivity. Reducing stress during routine husbandry procedures is likely to improve animal welfare. We examined how the type of early handling of calves affected responses to two common husbandry procedures, ear-tagging and disbudding. Forty Holstein-Friesian calves (n = 20/treatment) were exposed to one of two handling treatments daily from 1 to 5 weeks of age: (1) positive (n = 20), involving gentle handling (soft voices, slow movements, patting), and (2) negative (n = 20), involving rough handling (rough voices, rapid movements, pushing). Heart rate (HR), respiration rate (RR) and behaviour (activity, tail flicking) were measured before and after ear-tagging and disbudding (2 days apart). Cortisol was measured at -20 (baseline), 20 and 40 min relative to disbudding time. There were no significant treatment differences in HR, RR or behaviour in response to either procedure. However, the following changes occurred across both treatment groups. HR increased after disbudding (by 14.7 ± 4.0 and 18.6 ± 3.8 bpm, positive and negative, respectively; mean ± s.e.m.) and ear-tagging (by 8.7 ± 3.1 and 10.3 ± 3.0 bpm, positive and negative, respectively). After disbudding, there was an increase in RR (by 8.2 ± 3.4 and 9.3 ± 3.4 breaths/min, positive and negative, respectively), overall activity (by 9.4 ± 1.2 and 9.9 ± 1.3 frequency/min, positive and negative, respectively) and tail flicking (by 13.2 ± 2.8 and 11.2 ± 3.0 frequency/min, positive and negative, respectively), and cortisol increased from baseline at 20 min post procedure (by 10.3 ± 1.1 and 12.3 ± 1.1 nmol/l positive and negative, respectively). Although we recorded significant changes in calf responses during ear-tagging and disbudding, the type of prior handling had no effect on responses. The effects of handling may have been overridden by the degree of pain and/or stress associated with the procedures. Further research is warranted to understand the welfare impact and interaction between previous handling and responses to husbandry procedures.
动物与人之间的互动性质是影响动物福利和生产效率的一个重要因素。减少日常饲养过程中的压力可能会提高动物福利。我们研究了小牛早期处理的类型如何影响两种常见饲养程序(耳标和去角)的反应。40 头荷斯坦-弗里生小牛(n = 20/处理)从 1 到 5 周龄每天接受两种处理之一:(1)积极(n = 20),涉及轻柔处理(柔和的声音、缓慢的动作、轻拍),(2)消极(n = 20),涉及粗暴处理(粗暴的声音、快速的动作、推搡)。在耳标和去角(间隔 2 天)前后测量心率(HR)、呼吸率(RR)和行为(活动、甩尾)。在去角时间的 -20 分钟(基线)、20 分钟和 40 分钟测量皮质醇。两种处理方式对两种程序的反应均无显著的处理差异。然而,在两个处理组中都发生了以下变化。去角后 HR 升高(分别增加 14.7 ± 4.0 和 18.6 ± 3.8 bpm,积极和消极处理)和耳标(分别增加 8.7 ± 3.1 和 10.3 ± 3.0 bpm,积极和消极处理)。去角后,RR 增加(分别增加 8.2 ± 3.4 和 9.3 ± 3.4 次/分钟,积极和消极处理),总活动量(分别增加 9.4 ± 1.2 和 9.9 ± 1.3 次/分钟,积极和消极处理)和甩尾(分别增加 13.2 ± 2.8 和 11.2 ± 3.0 次/分钟,积极和消极处理),皮质醇在术后 20 分钟从基线增加(分别增加 10.3 ± 1.1 和 12.3 ± 1.1 nmol/l,积极和消极处理)。尽管我们记录了小牛在耳标和去角过程中的反应有显著变化,但之前处理的类型对反应没有影响。处理的影响可能被程序相关的疼痛和/或压力所掩盖。需要进一步研究以了解之前的处理和对饲养程序的反应之间的福利影响和相互作用。