Skip to main content Accessibility help

Objectively measuring behaviour traits in an automated restraint-test for ungulates: towards making temperament measurable

  • K. L. GRAUNKE (a1), J. LANGBEIN (a1), D. REPSILBER (a2) and P-C. SCHÖN (a1)


The personality of an animal is described by traits that cause consistent actions and reactions to environmental stimuli. An important part of personality is the reaction to unpleasant or uncontrollable situations. Methods described in the literature to measure personality in animals are often based on measuring or rating escape behaviour in these situations. In the methods described, human handlers are frequently part of the experiment or the animals’ personalities are scored by humans. Thus, these methods are at least partly subjective.

In the current study, an appliance to measure objectively the escape behaviour of ungulates and their reluctance during an uncontrollable situation (restraint) with a rather simple and comprehensible methodology is presented using a force transducer with adequate peripheral equipment. While the animals were restrained, a tractive force-time diagram describing escape behaviour was recorded and later analysed with software developed specifically.

To evaluate this newly developed technical method, 24 three-month-old calves were restrained by being tethered for 30 min on a halter that was connected to the force transducer. From the tractive force-time diagram, tractive force, maximal tractive force and the number of pulls that the calves performed during 5-min intervals were calculated. The multivariate results were analysed with a k-means-algorithm (function ‘kcca’) and a hierarchical clustering (function ‘hclust’) included in R version 2.12.1.

Both analyses revealed two clearly separated clusters including the same individuals in each analysis. The animals of cluster 1 showed a continuously higher reaction level than those of cluster 2 with a strong reaction in the beginning, a short decrease before increasing during the middle of the experiment and a final decrease at the end of the test. The animals of cluster 2 had a lower and quite steady reaction level throughout the experiment, although even here a slight increase during the middle of the experiment could be detected before a final decrease towards the end of the test was shown. There was no significant difference in weight between the two clusters.

The results showed that this newly developed method was able to detect differences in the animals’ escape behaviour patterns and reluctance with the measured parameters.


Corresponding author

*To whom all correspondence should be addressed.


Hide All
Benhajali, H., Boivin, X., Sapa, J., Pellegrini, P., Boulesteix, P., Lajudie, P. & Phocas, F. (2010). Assessment of different on-farm measures of beef cattle temperament for use in genetic evaluation. Journal of Animal Science 88, 35293537.
Boissy, A. (1995). Fear and fearfulness in animals. Quarterly Review of Biology 70, 165191.
Boissy, A. & Bouissou, M.-F. (1988). Effects of early handling on heifers’ subsequent reactivity to humans and to unfamiliar situations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20, 259273.
Boivin, X., Gilard, F. & Egal, D. (2009). The effect of early human contact and the separation method from the dam on responses of beef calves to humans. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 120, 132139.
Broom, D. M. (1988). The scientific assessment of animal welfare. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 20, 519.
Burrow, H. M. (1997). Measurements of temperament and their relationship with performance traits of beef cattle. Animal Breeding Abstracts 65, 477495.
Burrow, H. M. (1998). The effects of inbreeding on productive and adaptive traits and temperament of tropical beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 55, 227243.
Coleman, K., Tully, L. A. & McMillan, J. L. (2005). Temperament correlates with training success in adult rhesus macaques. American Journal of Primatology 65, 6371.
de Passillé, A. M., Rushen, J., Ladewig, J. & Petherick, C. (1996). Dairy calves’ discrimination of people based on previous handling. Journal of Animal Science 74, 969974.
Fell, L. R., Colditz, I. G., Walker, K. H. & Watson, D. L. (1999). Associations between temperament, performance and immune function in cattle entering a commercial feedlot. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 39, 795802.
Fleischrind Stölln GmbH (2007). Charolais-Rinder aus dem Havelland. Wilfried Zachert. Available online at: (verified 7 March 2012).
Fordyce, G., Dodt, R. M. & Wythes, J. R. (1988 a). Cattle temperaments in extensive beef herds in Northern Queensland. 1. Factors affecting temperament. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 28, 683687.
Fordyce, G., Goddard, M. E., Tyler, R., Williams, G. & Toleman, M. (1985). Temperament and bruising of Bos indicus cattle. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 25, 283288.
Fordyce, G., Wythes, J. R., Shorthose, W. R., Underwood, D. W. & Shepherd, R. K. (1988 b). Cattle temperaments in extensive beef herds in Northern Queensland. 2. Effect of temperament on carcass and meat quality. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 28, 689693.
Forkman, B., Boissy, A., Meunier-Salaün, M.-C., Canali, E. & Jones, R. B. (2007). A critical review of fear tests used on cattle, pigs, sheep, poultry and horses. Physiology and Behaviour 92, 340374.
Gaden, B., Burrow, H. & Pettiford, S. (2004). Flight time – a practical way to improve feedlot performance, temperament and tenderness. In Producing Quality Beef – Opportunities for Beef Producers from the CRC for Cattle and Beef Quality (Ed Gaden, B.), pp. 2628. Armidale, NSW, Australia: CRC for Cattle and Beef Quality.
Gibbons, J. M., Lawrence, A. B. & Haskell, M. J. (2011). Consistency of flight speed and response to restraint in a crush in dairy cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 131, 1520.
Grandin, T. (1993). Behavioral agitation during handling of cattle is persistent over time. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 36, 19.
Grignard, L., Boivin, X., Boissy, A. & Le Neindre, P. (2001). Do beef cattle react consistently to different handling situations? Applied Animal Behaviour Science 71, 263276.
Kilgour, R. J., Melville, G. J. & Greenwood, P. L. (2006). Individual differences in the reaction of beef cattle to situations involving social isolation, close proximity of humans, restraint and novelty. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 99, 2140.
Koolhaas, J. M., De Boer, S. F., Coppens, C. M. & Buwalda, B. (2010). Neuroendocrinology of coping styles: Towards understanding the biology of individual variation. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology 31, 307321.
Lanier, J. L., Grandin, T., Green, R. D., Avery, D. & McGee, K. (2000). The relationship between reaction to sudden, intermittent movements and sounds and temperament. Journal of Animal Science 78, 14671474.
Le Neindre, P., Trillat, G., Sapa, J., Ménissier, F., Bonnet, J. N. & Chupin, J. M. (1995). Individual differences in docility in Limousin cattle. Journal of Animal Science 73, 22492253.
Leisch, F. (2006). A toolbox for k-centroids cluster analysis. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 51, 526544.
Locurto, C. (2007). Individual differences and animal personality. Comparative Cognition and Behaviour Reviews 2, 6778.
Manteca, X. & Deag, J. M. (1993). Individual differences in temperament of domestic animals: a review of methodology. Animal Welfare 2, 247268.
Matthews, L. R., Carragher, J. F. & Slater, J. L. (1997). Effects of flightiness, sociability and previous handling experience on the behaviour of cattle in yards (abstract). In Proceedings of the 31st International Conference of the ISAE, 13–16 August 1997 (Eds Špinka, M., Illmann, G., Maletìnská, J., Štìtková, Z. & , L., Bartoš), p. 94. Prague, Czech Republic: International Society of Applied Ethology.
Mayer, J. D. (1986). How mood influences cognition. In Advances in Cognitive Science (Ed. Sharkey, N. E.), pp. 290314. Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Ellis Horwood Limited.
R Development Core Team (2008). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Traditional Herefords (2008). The Official Traditional Hereford Web Site. Available online at (verified 7 March 2012).
Veissier, I., Le Neindre, P. & Trillat, G. (1989). Adaptability of calves during weaning. Biology of Behaviour 14, 6687.
Voisinet, B. D., Grandin, T., O'Connor, S. F., Tatum, J. D. & Deesing, M. J. (1997b). Bos indicus cross feedlot cattle with excitable temperaments have tougher meat and a higher incidence of borderline dark cutters. Meat Science 46, 367377.
Voisinet, B. D., Grandin, T., Tatum, J. D., O'Connor, S. F. & Struthers, J. J. (1997 a). Feedlot cattle with calm temperaments have higher average daily weight gains than cattle with excitable temperaments. Journal of Animal Science 75, 892896.
Waiblinger, S., Boivin, X., Pedersen, V., Tosi, M.-V., Janczak, A. M., Visser, E. K. & Jones, R. B. (2006). Assessing the human-animal relationship in farmed species: a critical review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 101, 185242.
Welfare Quality® (2009). Training in the Welfare Quality® Assessment Protocols. Lelystad, The Netherlands: Welfare Quality®. Available online at: (verified 3 March 2012).

Objectively measuring behaviour traits in an automated restraint-test for ungulates: towards making temperament measurable

  • K. L. GRAUNKE (a1), J. LANGBEIN (a1), D. REPSILBER (a2) and P-C. SCHÖN (a1)


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed