Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T22:15:04.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conditioned feeding responses in sheep to flavoured foods associated with sulphur doses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

J. Hills ,
I. Kyriazakis ,
J.V. Nolan ,
G.N. Hinch  and
J.J. Lynch
J. Hills
Affiliation:
Cooperative Research Centre for the Cattle and Beef Industry (Meat Quality), University of New England, Armidale, 2351, NSW, Australia
I. Kyriazakis
Affiliation:
Animal Biology Division, Scottish Agricultural College, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG
J.V. Nolan
Affiliation:
School of Rural Science and Natural Resources, Division of Animal Science, University of New England, Armidale, 2351, NSW, Australia
G.N. Hinch
Affiliation:
School of Rural Science and Natural Resources, Division of Animal Science, University of New England, Armidale, 2351, NSW, Australia
J.J. Lynch
Affiliation:
School of Rural Science and Natural Resources, Division of Animal Science, University of New England, Armidale, 2351, NSW, Australia
Get access

Abstract

A study was conducted to determine whether sheep form conditioned flavour aversions (CFAs) or preferences (CFPs) for food flavours associated, respectively, with excessive or appropriate concentrations of sulphur (S) and also whether the rate of formation and strength of CFAs and CFPs are dependent on the animal's initial S status or the level of administration of S. In experiment 1, 48 mature ewes were conditioned to associate a new food containing a novel flavour with an infusion of S delivered intra-ruminally, or the same food containing another novel flavour with an infusion of distilled water. The same flavours were then used in experiment 2. At the end of each conditioning period, the relative preference for the two flavoured foods was determined by measuring the amount of each food ingested during a two-choice, 20-min preference test. Experiment 1 consisted of two phases. In phase 1 each conditioning period lasted for 5 days and was repeated four times, whereas in phase 2 the conditioning period lasted for 8 days and was repeated three times.

In experiment 1 the sheep were initially in an S-adequate state. In experiment 2, the sheep were re-randomized to treatments and started in an S-depleted state. The conditioning periods also lasted for 8 days and were repeated three times. There was no evidence to support the hypothesis that sheep develop CFAs or CFPs to food flavours associated with S doses in phase 1 of experiment 1. In phase 2, however, sheep formed CFAs towards the food with the flavour they had come to associate with administration of high levels of S. Repeated exposure to the flavour associated with high levels of S led to stronger aversions and there was an interaction between the S dose level and conditioning periods, indicating that the rate of development of these CFAs was highest for the highest S dose levels. The differences between results of phase 1 and 2 were probably due to the different numbers of reinforcements and different intervals between specific flavour/dose associations.

In experiment 2 there was no evidence for the development of CFPs or CFAs to food flavours associated with S doses. The apparent indifference of the sheep to S was probably due to their responding more to their previous experience of the food flavours than to their S status. Spearman rank correlations on flavour preferences indicated that conditioned flavour responses formed in experiment 1 persisted in individual sheep when they were allocated at random into their new treatments in experiment 2 and influenced or masked the formation of new associations. This demonstration of ‘carry-over’ effects highlights the importance of considering an animal’s previous experience of flavours and their associations with post-ingestive consequences when coming to conclusions concerning current development of CFAs and CFPs. These results may also have more general implications for feeding studies in animals that are randomized into treatment groups without regard to their previous feeding experiences.

Keywords

conditioningflavour compoundsfood preferencessheepsulphurtoxicity
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Science , Volume 69 , Issue 2 , October 1999 , pp. 313 - 325
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Science 1999

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.)

References

Arnold, G.W. and Dudzinski, M.L. 1978. Ethology of free-ranging domestic animals. Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Arsenos, G. and Kyriazakis, I. 1999. The continuum between preferences and aversions for flavoured foods conditioned by administration of casein doses in sheep. Animal Science 68: 605–615.Google Scholar
Bird, P.R. 1972. Sulphur metabolism and excretion studies in ruminants. Х. Sulphide toxicity in sheep. Australian Journal of Biological Science 25: 1087–1098.Google Scholar
Bray, A.C. 1969. Sulphur metabolism in sheep. II. The absorption of inorganic sulphate and inorganic sulphide from the sheep’s rumen. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 20: 739–748.Google Scholar
Capaldi, E.D., Owens, J. and Palmer, K.A. 1994. Effects of food deprivation on learning and expression of flavor preferences conditioned by saccharin or sucrose. Animal Learning and Behavior 22: 173–180.Google Scholar
Denton, D.A. 1982. The hunger for salt. Springer Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
Du Toit, J.T., Provenza, F.D. and Nastis, A. 1991. Conditioned taste aversions: how sick must a ruminant get before it learns about toxicity in foods? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 30: 35–46.Google Scholar
Forbes, J.M. and Kyriazakis, I. 1995. Food preferences in farm animals — why don’t they always choose wisely? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 54: 429–440.Google Scholar
Frutos, P., Duncan, A.J., Kyriazakis, I. and Gordon, I.J. 1998. Learned aversion towards oxalic acid-containing foods by goats: does rumen adaptation to oxalic acid influence diet choice? Journal of Chemical Ecology 24: 383–397.Google Scholar
Garcia, J. 1989. Feed for Tolman: cognition and cathexis in concert. In Aversion avoidance and anxiety (ed. Nilsson, T. and Archer, L.), pp. 45–85. Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
Hogan, G.W. and Sword, A.M. 1995. Statistical methods for repeated measures data. Biomathematics and Statistics Scotland, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Julian, R.J. and Harrison, K.B. 1975. Sulphur poisoning in cattle. Canadian Veterinary Journal 16: 28–30.Google Scholar
Kandylis, K. 1983. Toxicology of sulfur in ruminants: review. Journal of Dairy Science 67: 2179–2187.Google Scholar
Kandylis, K. 1984. The role of sulphur in ruminant nutrition. A review. Livestock Production Science 11: 611–624.Google Scholar
Kyriazakis, I., Anderson, D.H. and Duncan, A.J. 1998. Conditioned flavour aversions in sheep — the relationship between the dose rate of a secondary plant compound and the acquisition and persistence of aversions. British Journal of Nutrition 79: 55–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyriazakis, I., Papachristou, T.G., Duncan, A.J. and Gordon, I.J. 1997. Mild conditioned food aversions developed by sheep towards flavors associated with plant secondary compounds. Journal of Chemical Ecology 23: 727–746.Google Scholar
Launchbaugh, K.L. and Provenza, F.D. 1994. The effect of flavor concentration and toxin dose on the formation and generalization of flavor aversions in lambs. Journal of Animal Science 72: 10–13.Google Scholar
Launchbaugh, K.L., Provenza, F.D. and Burritt, E.A. 1993. How herbivores track variable environments — response to variability of phytotoxins. Journal of Chemical Ecology 19: 1047–1056.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, D. 1954. The reduction of sulphate in the rumen of the sheep. Biochemistry Journal 56: 391–399.Google Scholar
Pascoe, P.J., Peake, M.J. and Walmsley, R.N. 1984. Determination of inorganic sulfate in plasma with a centrifugal analyzer. Clinical Chemistry 30: 275–277.Google Scholar
Provenza, F.D. 1995. Postingestive feedback as an elementary determinant of food preference and intake in ruminants. Journal of Range Management 48: 2–17.Google Scholar
Provenza, F. D. 1996. Acquired aversions as the basis for varied diets of ruminants foraging on rangelands. Journal of Animal Science 74: 2010–2020.Google Scholar
Provenza, F.D. and Balph, D.F. 1990. Applicability of five diet-selection models to various foraging challenges ruminants encounter. In Behavioural mechanisms of food selection (ed. Hughes, R.N.), pp. 423–459. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Provenza, F.D., Lynch, J.J. and Nolan, J.V. 1994. Food aversion conditioned in anesthetized sheep. Physiology and Behavior 55: 429–432.Google Scholar
Provenza, F.D., Nolan, J.V. and Lynch, J.J. 1993. Temporal contiguity between food ingestion and toxicosis affects the acquisition of food aversions in sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 38: 269–281.Google Scholar
Qi, K., Lu, C.D., Owens, F.N. and Lupton, C.J. 1992. Sulfate supplementation of Angora goats: metabolic and mohair responses. Journal of Animal Science 70: 2828–2837.Google Scholar
Qi, K., Owens, F.N. and Lu, C.D. 1994. Effects of sulfur deficiency on performance of fiber-producing sheep and goats: a review. Small Ruminant Research 14: 115–126.Google Scholar
Ralphs, R.H., Provenza, F.D., Wiedmeier, R.D. and Bunderson, F.B. 1995. Effects of energy source and food flavor on conditioned preferences in sheep. Journal of Animal Science 73: 1651–1657.Google Scholar
Rozin, P. 1976. The selection of foods by rats, humans and other animals. In Advances in the study of behavior (ed. Rosenblatt, J.S. Hinde, J.A. Shaw, E. and Beer, C.), pp. 21–76. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Rozin, P.N. and Schulkin, J. 1991. Food selection. In Handbook of behavioral neurobiology: neurobiology of feed and fluid intake (ed. Strieker, E.M.), pp. 297–328. Plenum Press, New York.Google Scholar
Rusiniak, K.W., Gustavson, C.R., Hankins, W.G. and Garcia, J. 1976. Prey-lithium aversions: laboratory rats and ferrets. Behavioral Biology 17: 73–85.Google Scholar
Sclafani, A. and Ackroff, K. 1994. Glucose- and fructose-conditioned flavour preferences in rats: taste verses postingestive conditioning. Physiology and Behavior 56: 399–405.Google Scholar
Seward, J.P. and Greathouse, S.R. 1973. Appetitive and aversive conditioning in thiamine-deficient rats. Journal of Comparitive Physiology and Psychology 83: 157–167.Google Scholar
Standing Committee on Agriculture and Resource Management. 1990. Feeding standards for Australian livestock. Ruminants. CSIRO, Melbourne.Google Scholar
Thorhallsdottir, A.G., Provenza, F.D. and Balf, D.F. 1987. Food aversion learning in lambs with or without a mother: discrimination, novelty and persistence. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 18: 327–340.Google Scholar
Villalba, J.J. and Provenza, F.D. 1996. Preference for flavored wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal administrations of sodium propionate. Journal of Animal Science 74: 2362–2368.Google Scholar
Villalba, J.J. and Provenza, F.D. 1997a. Preference for flavored wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal infusions of acetate and propionate. Journal of Animal Science 75: 2905–2914.Google Scholar
Villalba, J.J. and Provenza, F.D. 1997b. Preference for wheat straw by lambs conditioned with intraruminal infusions of starch. British Journal of Nutrition 77: 287–297.Google Scholar
Villalba, J.J. and Provenza, F.D. 1997c. Preference for flavoured foods by lambs conditioned with intraruminal administration of nitrogen. British Journal of Nutrition 78: 545–561.Google Scholar
Weir, W.C. and Rendig, V.V. 1954. Serum inorganic sulphate sulphur as a measure of the sulphur intake in sheep. Journal of Nutrition 54: 87–96.Google Scholar
Zahorik, D.M. and Bean, C.A. 1975. Resistance of recovery flavors to later associations with illness. Bulletin of the Psychonomie Society 6: 309–312.Google Scholar