Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T10:58:21.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Stray voltage threshold is better determined under choice test conditions in sheep

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2011

S. Roussel ,
M. Ennifar ,
A. Boissy ,
T. Louyot  and
C. Duvaux-Ponter
S. Roussel*
Affiliation:
AgroParisTech, Département Sciences de la Vie et Santé, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France INRA UMR Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France
M. Ennifar
Affiliation:
AgroParisTech, Département Sciences de la Vie et Santé, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France
A. Boissy
Affiliation:
INRA, UR1213 Herbivores, 63122 Saint-Genès Champanelle, France
T. Louyot
Affiliation:
Réseau de Transport d'Electricité, 34, rue Henri-Regnaul, 92068 Paris La Défense cedex, France
C. Duvaux-Ponter
Affiliation:
AgroParisTech, Département Sciences de la Vie et Santé, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France INRA UMR Modélisation Systémique Appliquée aux Ruminants, 16 rue Claude Bernard, 75005 Paris, France
*
†E-mail: roussel@agroparistech.fr
Get access

Abstract

Stray voltage (usually <10 V) can occur in farms. However, very little information is available related to sheep. In addition, little work has been carried out on the effects of the contextual conditions under which the animals are submitted to stray voltage. The aims of this study were (i) to determine the threshold voltage at which lambs start to express avoidance behaviour and (ii) to test if the contextual conditions (i.e. choice v. no-choice conditions) influence the determination of the threshold voltage inducing avoidance behaviour. Six-month-old female lambs fed ad libitum were trained to eat palatable pellets from one or two metallic feeders situated at the end of a 4-m long raceway. Voltage was then applied during a 2-min test to either the only feeder available (no-choice test, 1F, n = 13) or to the first of the two feeders in which the lamb started to eat (choice test, 2F, n = 13). The 1F lambs had to stop eating to avoid the voltage, whereas the 2F lambs were allowed to switch to the non-electrified feeder to carry on eating without any stray voltage. Stray voltage was applied every day, in steps of 0.5 V (AC, 50 Hz), from 0 up to 8 V. For voltages higher than 4.5 V, 2F lambs spent less time eating and ate less in the electrified feeder compared with the non-electrified feeder, and their latency to switch to the non-electrified feeder was shorter. In addition, a transient modification of behaviour was observed at 1.5 V. For 1F lambs, a decrease in the quantity of feed eaten was found for voltages higher than 5 V, although the time spent eating in the electrified feeder was not modified. Finally, 1F lambs urinated more during or just after the 2 min test than 2F lambs for voltages above 5 V. Although lambs with no choice experienced stray voltage as a negative event (increased occurrence of urination), they carried on eating in the electrified feeder whatever the voltage. Therefore, the contextual conditions in which animals are exposed to stray voltage influence their subsequent reactions: the first clear behavioural reaction threshold is easier to detect in choice than in no-choice conditions.

Keywords

lambsstray voltagefeeding behaviourchoice testcontrollability
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 5 , Issue 6 , June 2011 , pp. 918 - 926
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2011

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

Appleman, RD, Gustafson, RJ 1985. Source of stray voltage and effect on cow health and performance. Journal of Dairy Science 68, 1554–1557.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armfield, JM 2006. Cognitive vulnerability: a model of the etiology of fear. Clinical Psychology Review 26, 746–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beausoleil, NJ, Stafford, KJ, Mellor, DJ 2005. Sheep show more aversion to a dog than to a human in an arena test. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 91, 219–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brugère, H 2002. Effets du courant électrique sur les animaux d’élevage. Bulletin de la Société vétérinaire pratique de France 86, 182–196.Google Scholar
Cabanac, M, Johnson, KG 1983. Analysis of a conflict between palatability and cold exposure in rats. Physiology and Behavior 31, 249–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dantzer, R 2002. Can farm animal welfare be understood without taking into account the issues of emotion and cognition? Journal of Animal Science 80, E1–E9.Google Scholar
Erhard, HW, Elston, DA, Davidson, GC 2006. Habituation and extinction in an approach–avoidance test: an example with sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 99, 132–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godcharles, L, Robert, S, Matte, JJ, Bertin-Mahieux, J, Martineau, GP 1993. Transient stray voltage: is it detrimental to growth performance, health status and welfare of market pigs? Veterinary Research Communications 17, 41–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grandin, T, Curtis, SE, Widowski, TM, Thurmon, JC 1986. Electro-immobilization versus mechanical restraint in an avoid-avoid choice test for ewes. Journal of Animal Science 62, 1469–1480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greiveldinger, L, Veissier, I, Boissy, A 2009. Behavioural and physiological responses of lambs to controllable vs. uncontrollable aversive events. Psychoneuroendocrinology 34, 805–814.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hultgren, J 1990. Small electric currents affecting farm animals and man: a review with special reference to stray voltage. I. Electric properties of the body and the problem of stray voltage. Veterinary Research Communications 14, 287–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karsh, EB 1963. Changes in intensity of punishment: effect on running behaviour of rats. Science 140, 1084–1085.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirk, JH, Reese, ND, Bartlett, PC 1984. Stray voltage on Michigan dairy farms. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 185, 426–428.Google ScholarPubMed
Lefcourt, AM, Akers, RM, Miller, RH, Weinland, B 1985. Effects of intermittent electrical shock on responses related to milk ejection. Journal of Dairy Science 68, 391–401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, SM 1979. Controllability and human stress: method, evidence and theory. Behaviour Research and Therapy 17, 287–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norell, RJ, Gustafson, RJ, Appleman, RD, Overmier, JB 1983. Behavioral studies of dairy cattle sensitivity to electrical currents. Transactions of the ASAE 16, 1506–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Przekop, F, Stupnicka, E, Wolińska-Witort, E, Mateusiak, K, Sadowski, B, Domański, E 1985. Changes in circadian rhythm and suppression of the plasma cortisol level after prolonged stress in the sheep. Acta Endocrinologica 110, 540–545.Google ScholarPubMed
Reinemann, DJ, Stetson, LE, Laughlin, NE, LeMire, SD 2005. Water, feed, and milk production response of dairy cattle exposed to transient currents. Transactions of the ASAE 48, 385–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinemann, DJ, Wiltbank, MC, Rasmussen, MD, Sheffield, LG, LeMire, SD 2003. Comparison of behavioral to physiological response of cows exposed to electric shock. Transactions of the ASAE 46, 507–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rigalma, K, Duvaux-Ponter, C, Barrier, A, Charles, C, Ponter, AA, Deschamps, F, Roussel, S 2010. Medium-term effects of repeated exposure to stray voltage on activity, stress physiology, and milk production and composition in dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 93, 3542–3552.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rigalma, K, Duvaux-Ponter, C, Oliveira, A, Martin, O, Louyot, T, Deschamps, F, Roussel, S. Determination of a stray voltage threshold in Holstein heifers, influence of predictability and past-experience on behavioural and physiological responses. Animal Welfare (in press).Google Scholar
Robert, S, Matte, JJ, Bertin-Mahieux, J, Martineau, GP 1991. Effects of continuous stray voltage on health, growth and welfare of fattening pigs. Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research 55, 371–376.Google ScholarPubMed
Rushen, J 1986a. The validity of behavioural measures of aversion : a review. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 16, 309–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rushen, J 1986b. Aversion of sheep to electro-immobilization and physical restraint. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 15, 315–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, KR 2001. Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. In Appraisal processes in emotion: theory, methods, research (ed. KR Scherer, A Schorr and T Johnstone), pp. 92–120. Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Versace, E, Morgante, M, Pulina, G, Vallortigara, G 2007. Behavioural lateralization in sheep (Ovis aries). Behavioural Brain Research 184, 72–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
von Borell, E, Langbein, J, Despres, G, Hansen, S, Leterrier, C, Marchant-Forde, J, Marchant-Forde, R, Minero, M, Mohr, E, Prunier, A, Valance, D, Veissier, I 2007. Heart rate variability as a measure of autonomic regulation of cardiac activity for assessing stress and welfare in farm animals – a review. Physiology and Behavior 92, 293–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Weiss, JM 1972. Psychological factors in stress and disease. Scientific American 226, 104–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wiepkema, PR 1987. Behavioural aspects of stress. In Biology of stress in farm animals: an integrative approach (ed. PR Wiepkema and PWM Van Adrichem), pp. 113–133. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolverton, WL 2003. A novel choice method for studying drugs as punishers. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 76, 125–131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zvolensky, MJ, Lejuez, CW, Eifert, GH 2000. Prediction and control: operational definitions for the experimental analysis of anxiety. Behaviour Research and Therapy 38, 653–663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed