Robins Andrew, Goma Amira A, Ouine Lucie, Phillips Clive J C
Centre for Animal Welfare and Ethics, School of Veterinary Science, University of Queensland, Gatton, QLD, Australia.
Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria, Egypt.
Anim Cogn. 2018 Sep;21(5):685-702. doi: 10.1007/s10071-018-1203-1. Epub 2018 Jul 13.
We report a range of lateralized coping strategies adopted by large social groups of cattle in response to mild challenges posed by humans of varying degrees of familiarity. At either 14 or 18 pens at a commercial feedlot, with 90 to 200 cattle in each, we conducted a series of video recorded 'pressure tests'. 'Frontal' pressure tests involved walking from a position perpendicular to the concrete feed bunk of a given pen, towards the geometric centre of the line of feeding cattle. 'Bunk-side' pressure tests involved experimenters walking closely past a pen of feeding cattle in one direction, before returning in the opposite direction shortly afterwards. Experimenters wore white dust masks to alter their facial features in the bunk-side pressure tests. In both frontal and bunk-side pressure tests, distance from the experimenter influenced cattle's choice of binocular viewing, cessation of feeding, standing or stepping backwards to monitor the approach and leaving the feed bunk. The frequency of these coping strategies differed in a lateralized manner. The cattle were more likely to accept the close positioning of a generally familiar, unmasked human on their left, which is traditionally referred to as the "near" side. By contrast, when responding to the approach of an unfamiliar, masked human, cattle conformed to the general vertebrate model and were more likely to remove themselves from the potential threat viewed within the left and not right visual field. We argue that the traditional terms for livestock sidedness as "near" (left) and "off" (right) sides demonstrate a knowledge of behavioural lateralization in domestic livestock that has existed for over 300 years of stock handling.
我们报告了大型牛群所采用的一系列偏向一侧的应对策略，这些策略是针对不同熟悉程度的人类所带来的轻度挑战而做出的反应。在一个商业饲养场的14个或18个围栏中，每个围栏有90至200头牛，我们进行了一系列视频记录的“压力测试”。“正面”压力测试包括从与给定围栏的混凝土饲料槽垂直的位置，朝着采食牛群所在直线的几何中心走去。“槽边”压力测试包括实验者先沿一个方向紧贴采食牛群的围栏走过，然后不久后沿相反方向返回。在“槽边”压力测试中，实验者戴着白色防尘口罩以改变面部特征。在正面和槽边压力测试中，与实验者的距离都会影响牛选择双眼观察、停止采食、站立或向后退以监测接近情况以及离开饲料槽的行为。这些应对策略的频率以偏向一侧的方式有所不同。牛更有可能接受一个通常熟悉且未戴口罩的人靠近其左侧，传统上这一侧被称为“近”侧。相比之下，当对一个不熟悉且戴口罩的人的靠近做出反应时，牛遵循一般脊椎动物的模式，更有可能从左视野而非右视野中察觉到的潜在威胁中撤离。我们认为，家畜身体两侧传统上被称为“近”（左）和“远”（右）侧的说法，表明了在超过300年的畜牧管理过程中，人们对家畜行为偏向一侧性的认识。
