The Behavioural Response of Beef Cattle When Weaning Is Imposed
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The behavioural response of cattle (Bos taurus) to artificial weaning in two stages A thesis submitted to the College of Graduate Studies and Research in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon By Derek B. Haley © Copyright Derek B. Haley, June 2006. All rights reserved. PERMISSION TO USE STATEMENT In presenting this thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Postgraduate degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this thesis in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by the professor or professors who supervised my thesis work or, in their absence, by the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which my thesis work was done. It is understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis or parts thereof for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due recognition shall be given to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use which may be made of any material in my thesis. Requests for permission to copy or to make other use of material in this thesis in whole or part should be addressed to: Head of the Department of Large Animal Clinical Sciences University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, S7N 5B4 i ABSTRACT Two factors presumed to affect the behavioural response of cattle (Bos taurus) to artificial weaning were investigated: the termination of nursing, and the physical separation of cows and calves. A two-stage process was used to disconnect these traditionally linked components. First, the behaviour of cows and calves was quantified in response to preventing nursing by having calves wear an antisucking device (Stage 1). Then the behavioural response of cows and calves to being separated was observed (Stage 2). Control pairs were weaned abruptly; nursing ended when cows and calves were separated. Preventing nursing while pairs were still together had almost no effect on measures of general activity with the exception of causing a slight increase in the rate of vocalizing. Calves wearing antisucking devices spent the same amount of time eating as controls. The behavioural responses of two-stage pairs to separation were favourably reduced compared to controls. In one study, two-stage cows vocalized 84% less than controls, spent 60% less time walking, and 13% more time lying, compared to controls. Two-stage calves called 97% less than controls, spent 61% less time walking, and 30% more time eating. In another study, preventing nursing for longer (3 versus 14 d) had no noticeable beneficial effects on the behaviour response to separation. In three separate trials two-stage calves gained more weight during the first week after separation from their dams. The two-stage process further reduced the behaviour responses when compared to weaning by fenceline contact. The benefits of two-stage weaning were also observed with dairy calves weaned from their dams at 5 weeks of age. The combined results of these studies indicate that the traditional method of weaning, by ii simultaneously terminating nursing and separating pairs, exacerbates the behavioural responses of cows and calves. Imposing these in two separate stages did not produce the same additive effect suggesting that the traditional weaning method produces a negative synergistic effect on the behaviour response. Based on the evidence two-stage weaning offers a viable production practice that is likely to improve the welfare of cows and calves. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost I want to sincerely thank my advisor and mentor Dr. Joseph Stookey for his insight and guidance throughout the course of my graduate studies. I am also grateful to all the other members of my graduate advisory committee for all their help: Drs. John Campbell, Terry Carruthers, Harold Gonyou and Eugene Janzen. Special thanks go to Dr. Derek Bailey and Montana State University, and Dr. Dan Weary and the University of British Columbia, for their collaboration and cooperation on studies appearing in this thesis. I also want to thank Dr. Cheryl Waldner for help with data analyses. I am thankful to Ms. Jean Clavelle and Dr. Jon Watts for their friendship and assistance on so many projects. I am very indebted to a number of undergraduate students who helped me with behaviour observations during these studies. They include: Carla Bell, Fleur Bennett, Christine Brenninkmeyer, Gina Bowen, Beth Bryson, Megan Buissson, Shannon Burns, Andria Christensen, Tracie Dewan, Jennifer Dodd, Quinn Gavaga, Chantelle Gratton, Candace Grier, Stephanie Hayne, Tara Hudye, Tennille Knezacek, Stacey Lieslar, Cindy Mack, Claire McCartney, Heidi Potter, Sherisse Sakals, Lisa Sarvas, Lisa Smith, Zoë Wagenaar, Patrick Whittaker, Dorothy Krysak. Funding of my graduate studentship, and the studies described in this thesis was provided by the Saskatchewan Agriculture Development Fund. Other very appreciated sources of financial support for travel to meetings and to carry out research include the iv Cecil E. Doige Fund, and the John Burgess Walkden Funds from the Western College of Veterinary Medicine, and the College of Graduate Studies and Research, University of Saskatchewan. I want to thank Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, where I have been employed as the Provincial Livestock Welfare Specialist, while completing my Ph.D.. The encouragement from all of my colleagues in Alberta has been greatly appreciated. Lastly I want to thank Dr. Zoë Wagenaar for all of her love and support, and patience throughout the process of completing this thesis. v TABLE OF CONTENTS PERMISSION TO USE STATEMENT.................................................................................... i ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................................. ii LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................................... ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS & DEFINITIONS.................................................................. xiii 1.0 GENERAL INTRODUCTON .........................................................................................1 1.1 Thesis objectives ...............................................................................................2 2.0 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE..................................................................................5 2.1 Abstract...................................................................................................................5 2.2. Introduction.............................................................................................................6 2.3 Natural weaning......................................................................................................8 2.4 Behavioural responses to artificial weaning .........................................................10 2.5 The consequences of artificial weaning and associated stressors .........................20 2.6 The effects of age and nutrition on the response of offspring to weaning............22 2.7 Abrupt weaning, by varying degrees of separation and fenceline contact............25 2.8 Effects of the social environment on the response to weaning .............................30 2.9 Progressive or gradual weaning ............................................................................34 2.10 Future research needs............................................................................................36 vi 3.0 WEANING CATTLE IN TWO STAGES CAUSES FEWER BEHAVIOURAL SIGNS OF DISTRESS THAN WEANING ABRUPTLY, BY SEPARATION ...........37 3.1 Abstract ...........................................................................................................37 3.2 Introduction.....................................................................................................38 3.3 Materials and methods .................................................................................... 41 3.4 Results .............................................................................................................49 3.5 Discussion .......................................................................................................61 4.0 WEANING CATTLE IN TWO STAGES: THE EFFECTS OF PREVENTING NURSING FOR 4 OR 8 DAYS ON THE RESPONSE OF COWS AND CALVES TO SUBSEQUENT PHYSICAL SEPARATION................................................................70 4. 1 Abstract ...........................................................................................................70 4.2 Introduction.....................................................................................................71 4.3 Materials and methods .................................................................................... 74 4.4 Results .............................................................................................................80 4.5 Discussion.............................................................................................................88 5.0 THE EFFECTS OF WEANING BEEF CALVES IN TWO STAGES ON...................94 THEIR BEHAVIOUR AND GROWTH RATE............................................................94 5.1 Abstract ...........................................................................................................94