Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T12:24:28.632Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Maternal influence on feeding site selection of male and female lambs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2014

R. L. Wesley ,
A. F. Cibils ,
C. M. Black-Rubio ,
E. R. Pollak  and
S. A. Utsumi
R. L. Wesley
Affiliation:
SRP-McGinley Ranch, Gordon, NE 69343, USA
A. F. Cibils*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal and Range Science, MSC 3-I, New Mexico State University, Box 30001, Las Cruces, NM 88003, USA
C. M. Black-Rubio
Affiliation:
Hidalgo Soil and Water Conservation District, Lordsburg, NM 88045, USA
E. R. Pollak
Affiliation:
SRP-McGinley Ranch, Gordon, NE 69343, USA
S. A. Utsumi
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Science and W.K. Kellogg Biological Station, Michigan State University, Hickory Corners, MI 49060, USA
*
†E-mail: acibils@nmsu.edu
Get access

Abstract

We conducted an experiment to determine whether early-life social learning of feeding site selection in lambs was sex-specific. Sixteen ewes and their new born lambs were used in a controlled experiment. Eight ewe–lamb pairs included a male lamb and the remaining eight a female lamb. All pairs were individually exposed to an experimental arena containing a safe and unsafe artificial feeding site (SFS, UFS) each consisting of nine bowls which contained either ground Bermuda grass hay (SFS) or ground alfalfa hay (UFS). The bowls in UFS were surrounded by bright orange traffic cones (visual cues). Half the ewes were trained with controlled electric shock to avoid UFS. Thus, pairs were randomly assigned to: (1) shock aversion training (SAT) to mothers of male lambs (MS); (2) SAT to mothers of female lambs (FS); (3) no aversion training (NAT, control) to mothers of male lambs (MC); and (4) NAT (control) to mothers of female lambs (FC). None of the lambs were subjected to SAT. During training, testing, extinction, and retraining ewe–lamb pairs were exposed to the arena together. Ewes were then removed from the experiment and two additional extinction phases were conducted with weaned lambs alone. Fear conditioning elicited UFS avoidance of both the trained ewes (means±s.e.m. % times observed in UFS during testing phase: FC=95.3±1.70; MC=94.4±4.87; FS=1.6±1.63; MS=0 ±0; P<0.01) and their naïve lambs (FC=83.8±6.07%; MC=76.6±6.56%; FS=30.4±7.90%; MS=33.9±9.23%; P<0.01). UFS avoidance in lambs occurred regardless of sex and tended to persist after weaning (% times observed in UFS during 1st post-weaning extinction phase: FC=92.6±4.50%; MC=89.8±6.09%; FS=45.1±10.57%; MS=43.5±10.42%; P=0.06). Fear conditioning in mothers appeared to alter sex-related differences in mother–infant behavioral synchrony by increasing and decreasing feeding synchrony of male and female lambs, respectively (FC: r=0.52, P<0.01; MC: r=−0.02, P=0.86; FS: r=0.14, P=0.26; MS: r=0.46, P<0.01). During the extinction phase mothers of ram lambs were observed feeding more often (FC=85.0±2.33%; MC=92.7±1.45%; FS=47.3±8.81%; MS=72±5.68%; P=0.02) and standing less often than ewes with daughters (FC=7.3±2.40%; MC=2.7±0.83%; FS=39.3±9.04%; MS=18.0±5.29%; P=0.06). This study suggests that social conditioning at an early age could be a viable tool to induce learning of feeding site avoidance in female and male lambs alike.

Keywords

feeding site selectionsocial learningsex-biased learningdiet selectionsheep
Type
Full Paper
Information
animal , Volume 8 , Issue 6 , June 2014 , pp. 991 - 999
Copyright
© The Animal Consortium 2014 

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

Black-Rubio, CM, Cibils, AF and Gould, WR 2007. Maternal influence on feeding site avoidance behaviour of lambs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 105, 122–139.Google Scholar
Blanchard, RJ and Blanchard, DC 1987. An ethoexperimental approach to the study of fear. The Psychological Record 37, 305–316.Google Scholar
Cibils, AF, Howery, LD and Ruyle, GB 2004. Diet and habitat selection by cattle: the relationship between skin- and gut-defense systems. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 88, 187–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coulon, M, Hild, S, Schroeer, A, Janczak, AM and Zanella, AJ 2011. Gentle vs. aversive handling of pregnant ewes: II. Physiology and behavior of the lambs. Physiology & Behavior 103, 575–584.Google Scholar
Coussi-Korbel, S and Fragaszy, DM 1995. On the relation between social dynamics and social learning. Animal Behaviour 50, 1441–1453.Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM 2004. How has the risk of predation shaped the behavioural responses of sheep to fear and distress. Animal Welfare 13, 269–281.Google Scholar
Dwyer, CM 2008. Genetic and physiological determinants of maternal behavior and lamb survival: implications for low-input sheep management. Journal of Animal Science 86, E246–E258.Google Scholar
Fallah-Rad, AH 1998. Interrelation between thyroid hormones and onset of puberty in ram lambs. The University of Manitoba, Canada.Google Scholar
Field, RA, Ho, L, Russell, WC, Riley, ML, Murdoch, WJ, Van Kirk, EA, Ercanbrack, SK and Williams, FL 1989. Influence of age and testosterone levels on masculine development in rams. Journal of Animal Science 67, 2943–2949.Google Scholar
Gallagher, GR and Prince, RH 2003. Negative operant conditioning fails to deter white tailed deer foraging activity. Crop Protection 22, 893–895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geist, V and Petocz, RG 1977. Bighorn sheep in winter: do rams maximize reproductive fitness by spatial and habitat segregation from ewes? Canadian Journal of Zoology 55, 1802–1810.Google Scholar
Guilhem, C, Bideau, E, Gerard, J-F, Maublanc, M-L and Pépin, D 2006. Early differentiation of male and female interactive behaviour as a possible mechanism for sexual segregation in mouflon sheep (Ovis gmelini). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 98, 54–69.Google Scholar
Hansen, I, Christiansen, F, Hansen, HS, Braastad, B and Bakken, M 2001. Variation in behavioural responses of ewes towards predator-related stimuli. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 70, 227–237.Google Scholar
Hernandez, CE, Bloomfield, FH, Harding, JE, Matthews, LR and Oliver, MH 2009. Effects of sex, litter size and periconceptional ewe nutrition on the ewe-lamb bond [electronic resource]. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 120, 76–83.Google Scholar
Hinch, GN, Elwin, RL, Lynch, JJ and Lecrivain, E 1987. Changes in maternal-young associations with increasing age of lambs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 17, 305–318.Google Scholar
Hinch, GN, Lynch, JJ, Elwin, RL and Green, GC 1990. Long-term associations between Merino ewes and their offspring. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 27, 93–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurnik, JF, Webster, AB and Siegel, PB 1995. Dictionary of farm animal behavior. Iowa State University Press, Aimes.Google Scholar
Jorgenson, JT, Festa-Bianchet, M and Berube, CH 1996. Reproductive costs of sons and daughters in Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. Behavioral Ecology 7, 60–68.Google Scholar
Lent, PC 1974. Mother-infant relationships in ungulates. In The behavior of ungulates and its relation to management (ed. V Geist and F Walther), pp. 14–55. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Morges.Google Scholar
Levy, F and Keller, M 2008. Neurobiology of maternal behavior in sheep. Advances in the Study of Behavior 38, 399–437.Google Scholar
Main, MB, Weckerly, FW and Vernon, CB 1996. Sexual segregation in ungulates: new directions for research. Journal of Mammalogy 77, 449–461.Google Scholar
Mathisen, JH, Landa, A, Andersen, R and Fox, JL 2003. Sex-specific differences in reindeer calf behavior and predation vulnerability. Behavioral Ecology 14, 10–15.Google Scholar
May, R, Andersen, R, Landa, A, van Dijk, J and JÄrM, Forland 2008. Behavioural patterns in ewe-lamb pairs and vulnerability to predation by wolverines. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 112, 58–67.Google Scholar
Mirza, SN and Provenza, FD 1990. Preference of the mother affects selection and avoidance of foods by lambs differing in age. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 28, 255–263.Google Scholar
Napolitano, F, De Rosa, G and Sevi, A 2008. Welfare implications of artificial rearing and early weaning in sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 110, 58–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolte, DL and Provenza, FD 1992. Food preferences in lambs after exposure to flavors in milk. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 32, 381–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parkinson, TJ, Smith, KC, Long, SE, Douthwaite, JA, Mann, GE and Knight, PG 2001. Inter-relationships among gonadotrophins, reproductive steroids and inhibin in freemartin ewes. Reproduction 122, 397–409.Google Scholar
Pryce, CR 1992. A comparative systems model of the regulation of maternal motivation in mammals. Animal Behaviour 43, 417–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowell, TE 1991. Till death us do part: long-lasting bonds between ewes and their daughters. Animal Behaviour 42, 681–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruckstuhl, KE and Festa-Bianchet, M 1998. Do reproductive status and lamb gender affect the foraging behavior of bighorn ewes? Ethology 104, 941–954.Google Scholar
Schanbacher, BD, Gomes, WR and VanDemark, NL 1974. Developmental changes in spermatogenesis, testicular carnitine acetyltransferase activity and serum testosterone in the ram. Journal of Animal Science 39, 889–892.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simitzis, PE, Deligeorgis, SG, Bizelis, JA and Fegeros, K 2008. Feeding preferences in lambs influenced by prenatal flavour exposure. Physiology & Behavior 93, 529–536.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sinclair, ARE, Mduma, S and Brashares, JS 2003. Patterns of predation in a diverse predator-prey system. Nature 425, 288–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vandenheede, M and Bouissou, MF 1993a. Sex differences in fear reactions in sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 37, 39–55.Google Scholar
Vandenheede, M and Bouissou, MF 1993b. Effect of androgen treatment on fear reactions in ewes. Hormones and Behavior 27, 435–448.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandenheede, M, Bouissou, MF and Picard, M 1998. Interpretation of behavioural reactions of sheep towards fear-eliciting situations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 58, 293–310.Google Scholar
Villaret, JC and Bon, R 1995. Social and spatial segregation in Alpine Ibex (Capra ibex) in Bargy, French Alps. Ethology 101, 291–300.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Wesley supplementary material

Wesley supplementary material

Download Wesley supplementary material(File)
File 161.3 KB