Literature DB >> 23958014

The effect of food location, heat load, and intrusive medical procedures on brushing activity in dairy cows.

R Mandel1, H R Whay, C J Nicol, E Klement.   

Abstract

Animals allocate time and effort to a range of core (e.g., sleeping, feeding, drinking) and "luxury" (e.g., playing, exploring) activities. A luxury activity is characterized by low resilience and, as such, will be reduced when time or energy resources are limited, including under conditions of stress or discomfort. One seemingly luxurious activity available to cows on an increasing number of dairy farms is rubbing against an automated brush. The current study examined the effect of distance from food, heat load, and an intrusive medical procedure (i.e., artificial insemination and transrectal pregnancy examination) on the resilience of brush usage. The probability of using the brush decreased significantly when food was located distantly from the brush (mean=0.53) compared with days when food was located closer to the brush (mean=0.81). Brush usage also decreased at high temperature and humidity levels, with an average decrease of 0.062 brushing events for an increase of 1 temperature-humidity index unit (95% confidence interval=-0.93-0.030). In addition, a significant reduction of approximately 50% in brushing activity was observed on days of artificial insemination compared with the preceding 3d and the following 3d. These findings show that brush usage is a low resilience activity that reduces under a range of conditions. It may thus have the potential to be used as an indicator of a range of health and welfare problems in cows. Further research should be conducted to assess the sensitivity and specificity of this suggested tool and its possible contribution to the early detection of morbidity.
Copyright © 2013 American Dairy Science Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  anhedonia; mechanical brush; stress; welfare

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23958014     DOI: 10.3168/jds.2013-6941

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Dairy Sci        ISSN: 0022-0302            Impact factor:   4.034


  7 in total

1.  Calves Use an Automated Brush and a Hanging Rope When Pair-Housed.

Authors:  Gosia Zobel; Heather W Neave; Harold V Henderson; James Webster
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 2.752

2.  Positive Welfare and the Like: Distinct Views and a Proposed Framework.

Authors:  Jean-Loup Rault; Sara Hintze; Irene Camerlink; Jason Richard Yee
Journal:  Front Vet Sci       Date:  2020-07-02

3.  Effect of a mechanical grooming brush on the behavior and health of recently weaned heifer calves.

Authors:  Ana Velasquez-Munoz; Diego Manriquez; Sushil Paudyal; Gilberto Solano; Hyungchul Han; Robert Callan; Juan Velez; Pablo Pinedo
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 2.741

4.  The effects of cow dominance on the use of a mechanical brush.

Authors:  Borbala Foris; Benjamin Lecorps; Joseph Krahn; Daniel M Weary; Marina A G von Keyserlingk
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-26       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  A "Good Life" for Dairy Cattle: Developing and Piloting a Framework for Assessing Positive Welfare Opportunities Based on Scientific Evidence and Farmer Expertise.

Authors:  Jessica E Stokes; Elizabeth Rowe; Siobhan Mullan; Joy C Pritchard; Rachel Horler; Marie J Haskell; Cathy M Dwyer; David C J Main
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 3.231

6.  Cows are highly motivated to access a grooming substrate.

Authors:  Emilie McConnachie; Anne Marieke C Smid; Alexander J Thompson; Daniel M Weary; Marek A Gaworski; Marina A G von Keyserlingk
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.703

Review 7.  How Can We Assess Positive Welfare in Ruminants?

Authors:  Silvana Mattiello; Monica Battini; Giuseppe De Rosa; Fabio Napolitano; Cathy Dwyer
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2019-10-02       Impact factor: 2.752

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.