Review of human-animal interactions and their impact on animal productivity and welfare

Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology

Idrus Zulkifli¹ 

[1] Institute of Tropical Agriculture, and Department of Animal Science, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400, UPM, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

关键词: Stress;    Productivity;    Human-animal interactions;    Fear;    Animal welfare;   

Others  :  805414
DOI  :  10.1186/2049-1891-4-25

 received in 2013-05-03, accepted in 2013-07-04,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Humans and animals are in regular and at times close contact in modern intensive farming systems. The quality of human-animal interactions can have a profound impact on the productivity and welfare of farm animals. Interactions by humans may be neutral, positive or negative in nature. Regular pleasant contact with humans may result in desirable alterations in the physiology, behaviour, health and productivity of farm animals. On the contrary, animals that were subjected to aversive human contact were highly fearful of humans and their growth and reproductive performance could be compromised. Farm animals are particularly sensitive to human stimulation that occurs early in life, while many systems of the animals are still developing. This may have long-lasting impact and could possibly modify their genetic potential. The question as to how human contact can have a positive impact on responses to stressors, and productivity is not well understood. Recent work in our laboratory suggested that pleasant human contact may alter ability to tolerate various stressors through enhanced heat shock protein (hsp) 70 expression. The induction of hsp is often associated with increased tolerance to environmental stressors and disease resistance in animals. The attitude and consequent behaviour of stockpeople affect the animals’ fear of human which eventually influence animals’ productivity and welfare. Other than attitude and behaviour, technical skills, knowledge, job motivation, commitment and job satisfaction are prerequisites for high job performance.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Zulkifli; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Siegel PB: Behavior-genetic analyses and poultry husbandry. Poult Sci 1993, 72:1-6.
• [2]Suarez SD, Gallup GG Jr: Open-field behaviour in chickens: the experimenter is a predator. J Comp Physiol Psycho 1982, 96:432-439.
• [3]Jones RB: Fear and distress. In Animal Welfare. Edited by Appleby MC, Hughes BO. Wallingford: CAB International; 1997:75-88.
• [4]Hemsworth PH, Coleman GJ: Human-Livestock Interactions: The Stockperson and the Productivity and Welfare of Intensively Farmed Animals. Wallingford: CAB International; 1998.
• [5]Hemsworth PH, Gonyou HW: Human contact. In Animal Welfare. Edited by Appleby MC, Hughes BO. Wallingford: CAB International; 1997:205-218.
• [6]Hemsworth PH: Human–animal interactions in livestock production. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2003, 85:185-198.
• [7]Waiblinger S, Boivin X, Pedersen V, Tosi MV, Janczak AM, Visser EK, Jones RB: Assessing the human-animal relationship in farmed species; A critical review. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2006, 101:185-242.
• [8]Jones RB: Fear and adaptability in poultry: insights, implications and imperatives. Wld’s Poult Sci J 1996, 52:131-174.
• [9]Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL: Human-Animal Interactions and Animal Stress. In The Biology of Animal Stress. Edited by Moberg GP, Mench JA. Wallingford: CAB International; 2000:309-315.
• [10]Estep DQ, Hetts S: Interactions, relationships and bonds: the conceptual basis for scientist-animal relations. In The Inevitable Bond-Examining Scientist-Animal Interactions. Edited by Davis H, Balfour AD. Cambridge: CAB International; 1992:6-26.
• [11]Hemsworth PH, Coleman GJ, Cox M, Barnett JL: Stimulus generalization: the inability of pigs to discriminate between humans on the basis of their previous handling experience. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1994, 40:129-142.
• [12]Jones RB: Ontogeny of the response to humans in handled and non-handled female domestic chicks. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1995, 42:261-269.
• [13]Tanida H, Nagano Y: The ability of miniature pigs to discriminate stimuli between a stranger and their familiar handler. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1998, 56:149-159.
• [14]Koba Y, Tanida H: How to miniature pigs discriminate between people? The effect of exchanging cues between a non-handler and their familiar handler on discrimination. J Anim Sci 1997 2001, 61:239-252.
• [15]Davies H, Taylor A: Discrimination between individual humans by domestic fowl. Br Poult Sci 2001, 42:267-279.
• [16]Boivin X, Desprès Nowak R, Nowak R, Tournadre H, Le NP: Discrimination between shepherds by lambs reared under artificial conditions. J Anim Sci 1997, 75:2982-2898.
• [17]Rybarczyk P, Koba Y, Rusehn J, Tanida De Passille H: Recognition of people by dairy calves using colour of clothing. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2000, 74:175-159.
• [18]Zulkifli I: Stress and disease development. In Diseases of Poultry in Southeast Asia. Edited by Zamri-Saad M. Serdang: UPM Press; 2006:1-8.
• [19]Moberg GP: Biological response to stress: Implications for animal welfare. In Biology of Animal Stress: Basic Principles and Implications for Animal Welfare. Edited by Moberg GP, Mench JA. Wallingford: CAB International; 2000:1-21.
• [20]Moberg GP: Biological response to stress: Key to assessment of animal well-being? In Animal Stress. Edited by Moberg GP. Bethesda, Maryland: American Physiological Society; 1985:27-49.
• [21]Jones RB: The assessment of fear in the domestic fowl. In Cognitive Aspects of Social Behaviour in the Domestic Fowl. Edited by Zayan R. Duncan: IJH: Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1987:40-81.
• [22]Craig JV, Adams AW: Behaviour and well-being of hens (Gallus domesticus) in alternative housing environments. Wld’s Poult Sci J 1984, 40:221-240.
• [23]Gray JA: The Psychology of Fear and Stress. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press; 1987.
• [24]Dantzer R, Mormède P: Stress in domestic animals: A psychoneuroendocrine approach. In Animal Stress. Edited by Moberg GP. Bethesda, Maryland: American Physiological Society; 1985:81-96.
• [25]Zulkifli I, Dunnington EA, Gross WB, Larsen AS, Martin A, Siegel PB: Responses of dwarf and normal chickens to feed restriction, Eimeria tenella infection and sheep red blood cell antigen. Poult Sci 72(193):1630-1640.
• [26]Zulkifli I, Siti Nor Azah A: Fear and stress reactions, and the performance of commercial broiler chickens subjected to regular pleasant and unpleasant contacts with human beings. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2004, 88:77-87.
• [27]Jones RB: The tonic immobility reaction of the domestic fowl. Wlds’ Poult Sci J 1986, 42:82-96.
• [28]Knowles TG, Broom DM: The handling and transport of broilers and spent hens. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1990, 28:75-91.
• [29]Zulkifli I, Che Norma MT, Chong CH, Loh TC: Heterophil/lymphocyte and tonic immobility reactions to pre-slaughter handling in broiler chickens treated with ascorbic acid. Poult Sci 2000, 79:402-406.
• [30]Zulkifli I, Che Norma MT, Chong CH, Loh TC: The effects of crating and road transportation on stress and fear responses of broiler chickens treated with ascorbic acid. Arch fur Geflugelk 2001, 65:33-37.
• [31]Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL, Hansen C: The influence of handling by humans on the behaviour, growth and corticosteroids in the juvenile female pig. Hormones Behav 1981, 15:396-403.
• [32]Breuer K, Hemsworth PH, Coleman GJ: The effect of positive or negative handling on the behavioural and physiological responses of nonlactating heifers. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2003, 84:3-22.
• [33]Lyons DM, Price EO, Moberg GP: Individual differences in temperament of domestic dairy goats: Constancy and change. Anim Behav 1988, 36:1323-1333.
• [34]Zulkifli I, Gilbert J, Liew PK, Ginsos J: The effects of regular visual contact on tonic immobility, heterophil/lymphocyte ratio, antibody and growth responses in broiler chickens. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2002, 79:103-112.
• [35]Al-Aqil A, Zulkifli I, Hair Bejo M, Sazili AQ, Rajion MA, Somchit MN: Changes in heat shock protein 70, blood parameters and fear-related behavior in broiler chickens as affected by pleasant and unpleasant human contact. Poult Sci 2013, 93:33-40.
• [36]Nicol CJ, Scott GB: Pre-slaughter handling and transport of broiler chickens. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1990, 58:57-73.
• [37]Lyons DM: Individual differences in temperament of dairy goats and the inhibition of milk injection. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1989, 22:269-282.
• [38]Jones RB: Reduction of domestic chick’s fear of humans by regular handling and related treatments. Anim Behav 1993, 46:991-998.
• [39]Barnett JL, Hemsworth PH, Hennesy DP, McCallum TH, Newman EA: The effects of modifying the amount of human contact on behavioural, physiological and production responses of laying hens. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1994, 41:87-100.
• [40]Levine S: Stress and behavior. Scientific Am 1967, 224:26-31.
• [41]Gross WB: Chicken-environment interactions. In Ethics and Animals. Edited by Miller HB, Williams WH: C. New Jersey: Human Press; 1983:329-337.
• [42]Hemsworth PH, Barnett PH, Hansen C: The influence of handling by humans on the behavior, reproduction and corticosteroids of male and female pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1986, 15:303-314.
• [43]Jones RB, Waddington D: Attenuation of the domestic chick’s fear of human beings via regular handling: in search of a sensitive period. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1993, 36:1021-1033.
• [44]Gross WB, Siegel PB: Socialization as a factor in resistance to disease, feed efficiency, and response to antigen in chickens. Am J Vet Res 1982, 43:2010-2012.
• [45]Jones RB, Hughes BO: Effects of regular handling on growth in male and female chicks of broiler and layer strains. Br Poult Sci 1981, 22:461-465.
• [46]Collins JW, Siegel PB: Human handling, flock size and response to an E. coli challenge in young chickens. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1987, 19:183-188.
• [47]Reichmann KG, Barram KM, Brock IJ, Standfast NF: Effects of regular handling and blood sampling by wing vein puncture on the performance of broilers and pullets. Br Poult Sci 1978, 19:97-99.
• [48]Freeman BM, Manning ACC: Stressor effects of handling on the immature fowl. Res Vet Sci 1979, 26:223-226.
• [49]Paterson AM, Pearce GP: Boar-induced puberty in gilts handled pleasantly or unpleasantly during rearing. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1989, 22:225-233.
• [50]Pearce GP, Paterson AM, Pearce AN: The influence of pleasant and unpleasant handling and provision of toys on the growth and behavior of male pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1989, 23:27-37.
• [51]Rushen J, Munksgaard L, Marnet PG, Passillé D: Human contact and the effects of acute stress on cows at milking. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2001, 73:1-14.
• [52]Ader R, Cohen N: Psychoneuroimmunology: Conditioning and Stress. Ann. Rev Psychol 1993, 44:53-85.
• [53]Meaney MJ, Bhatnagar S, Diorio J, Larocque S, Francis D, O’Donnell O, Shanks N, Sharma S, Smythe J, Viau V: Molecular basis for the development of individual differences in the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal stress response. Cell Mol Neurobiol 1993, 13:321-347.
• [54]Blecha F: Immunomodulation: a means of disease prevention in stressed livestock. J Anim Sci 1988, 66:2084-2090.
• [55]Griffin JF: Stress and immunity: a unifying concept. Vet Immunol Immunopathol 1989, 20:263-312.
• [56]Zulkifli I, Siegel PB: Is there a positive side to stress? Wld’s Poult Sci J 1995, 51:63-76.
• [57]Siegel PB, Gross WB: General principles of stress and well-being. In Livestock Handling and Transport. Edited by Grandin T. Wallingford: CAB International; 2000:27-42.
• [58]Madden KS, Livnat S: Catecholamine action and immunologic reactivity. In Psychoneuroimmunology II. Edited by Ader R, Felten DL, Cohen N. San Diego: Academic Press; 1991:283-310.
• [59]Gross WB, Siegel PB: Influence of sequences of environmental factors on the response of chickens to fasting and to Staphylococcus aureus infection. Am J Vet Res 1982, 43:137-139.
• [60]Gross WB, Siegel PB: Socialization, the sequencing of environmental factors, and their effects on weight gain and disease resistance of chickens. Poult Sci 1983, 62:592-598.
• [61]Jones RB, Faure JM: The effects of regular handling on fear in the domestic chick. Behav Proc 1981, 6:135-143.
• [62]Jones RB, Waddington D: Modification of fear in domestic chicks, Gallus gallus domesticus via regular handling and early environmental enrichment. Anim Behav 1992, 43:1021-1033.
• [63]Fluck E, Hogg S, Jones RB, Bourne R, File SE: Changes in tonic immobility an dthe GABA: benzodiazepine system in response to handling in the chick. Pharmacol Bio-chem Behav 1997, 58:269-274.
• [64]Etches RJ, John TM, Verrinder Gibbins AM: Behavioural, physiological, neuroendocrine and molecular responses to heat stress. In Poultry Production in Hot Climates. Edited by Daghir NJ. CAB International; 1995:31-66.
• [65]Zulkifli I, Che Norma MT, Israf DA, Omar AR: The effects of early-age food restriction on heat shock protein 70 response in heat-stressed female broiler chickens. Br Poult Sc 2002, 43:141-145.
• [66]Zulkifli I, Al-Aqil A, Omar AR, Sazili AQ, Rajion MA: Crating and heat stress influences blood parameters and heat shock protein 70 expression in broiler chickens showing short or long tonic immobility reactions. Poult Sci 2009, 88:471-476.
• [67]Al-Aqil A, Zulkifli I: Changes in heat shock protein 70 expression and blood parameters in transported broiler chickens as affected by housing and early age feed restriction. Poult Sci 2009, 88:1358-1364.
• [68]Soleimani AF, Zulkifli I, Omar AR, Raha AR: Neonatal feed restriction modulates circulating levels of corticosterone, and expression of glucorticoid receptor and heat shock protein 70 in aged Japanese quail exposed to acute heat stress. Poult Sci 2011, 90:1427-1434.
• [69]Liew PK, Zulkifli I, Hair-Bejo M, Omar AR, Israf DA: Effects of early age feed restriction and thermal conditioning on heat shock protein 70 expression, resistance to infectious bursal disease and growth in male broiler chickens subjected to chronic heat stress. Poult Sci 2003, 82:1879-1885.
• [70]Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL, Hansen Coleman GL: A study of the relationships between the attitudinal and behavioural profiles of stockpersons and the level of fear of humans and reproductive performance of commercial pigs. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1989, 23:301-314.
• [71]Coleman GJ, Hemsworth PH, Hay M: Predicting stockperson behaviour towards pigs from attitudinal and job-related variables and empathy. Appl Anim Behav Sci 1998, 58:63-76.
• [72]Cransberg PH, Hemsworth PH, Coleman GL: Human factors affecting the behaviour and productivity of commercial broiler chickens. Br Poult Sci 2000, 41:272-279.