Relationship between behavioural reactivity and feed efficiency in housed sheep
C. Amdi A C E , A. R. Williams A , S. K. Maloney B , A. H. Tauson C , S. A. Knott D and D. Blache AA School of Animal Biology, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.
B School of Biomedical, Biomolecular and Chemical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.
C Department of Basic Animal and Veterinary Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Grønnegårdsvej 3, 1870 Frederiksberg C, Denmark.
D School of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia.
E Corresponding author. Email: charlotteamdi@hotmail.com
Animal Production Science 50(7) 683-687 https://doi.org/10.1071/AN09142
Submitted: 27 October 2009 Accepted: 29 April 2010 Published: 30 July 2010
Abstract
In this study we test the hypothesis that selecting sheep for a low behavioural reactivity to stressful situations will improve their metabolic efficiency, and thereby feed efficiency, during a controlled trial in an animal house. Twenty-four Merino wethers were used, 12 each from lines selected for high (HBR) and low (LBR) behavioural reactivity to stressful stimuli (human presence and social isolation). The sheep were habituated to the experimental procedures for 10 days, followed by 45 days during which voluntary feed intake was measured so that total daily energy intake was quantified. The sheep were weighed twice weekly before daily feeding. Feed efficiency was determined by measuring net feed intake, average daily weight gain and body condition score. Our hypothesis was not supported by the results of this study. There was no difference between LBR and HBR sheep in average daily weight gain or body condition score. The net feed intake of HBR sheep was lower than that of LBR sheep (P = 0.02), indicating that under the conditions of our experiment, HBR sheep were actually more feed efficient than LBR sheep. This study was carried out on sheep with steady intakes and in familiar surroundings. It is possible that LBR sheep may be more efficient than HBR sheep in more stressful situations.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Dr Ian Williams and Dr Penny Hawken for helpful comments and advice. Staff from the Large Animal Facility and School of Animal Biology at the University of Western Australia are thanked for their help with animal care and weighing.
Arthur PF,
Archer JA, Herd RM
(2004) Feed intake and efficiency in beef cattle: overview of recent Australian research and challenges for the future. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 361–369.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Beausoleil NJ,
Blache D,
Stafford KJ,
Mellor DJ, Noble ADL
(2008) Exploring the basis of divergent selection for ‘temperament’ in domestic sheep. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 109, 261–274.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bickell SL,
Nowak R,
Poindron P,
Sèbe F,
Chadwick A,
Ferguson D, Blache D
(2009) Temperament does not affect the overall establishment of mutual preference between the mother and her young in sheep measured in a choice test. Developmental Psychobiology 51(5), 429–438.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
PubMed |
Boissy A, Bouissou MF
(1995) Assessment of individual differences in behavioural reactions of heifers exposed to various fear-eliciting situations. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 46, 17–31.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Boissy A,
Fisher AD,
Bouix J,
Hinch GN, Le Neindre P
(2005) Genetics of fear in ruminant livestock. Livestock Production Science 93, 23–32.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Burrow HM, Dillon RD
(1997) Relationships between temperament and growth in a feedlot and commercial carcass traits of Bos indicus crossbreds. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 37, 407–411.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fordyce G,
Dodt RM, Wythes JR
(1988) Cattle temperaments in extensive beef herds in northern Queensland. 1. Factors affecting temperament. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 28, 683–687.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Gonyou HW,
Hemsworth PH, Barnett JL
(1986) Effects of frequent interactions with humans in growing pigs. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 16, 269–278.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Herd RM, Bishop SC
(2000) Genetic variation in residual feed intake and its association with other production traits in British Hereford cattle. Livestock Production Science 63, 111–119.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Knott SA,
Cummins LJ,
Dunshea FR, Leury BJ
(2008) The use of different models for the estimation of residual feed intake (RFI) as a measure of feed efficiency in meat sheep. Animal Feed Science and Technology 143, 242–255.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Murphy PM,
Purvis IW,
Lindsay DR,
Le Neindre P,
Orgeur P, Poindron P
(1994) Measures of temperament are highly repeatable in Merino sheep and some are related to maternal behavior. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 20, 247–250.
Richardson EC,
Herd RM,
Archer JA, Arthur PF
(2004) Metabolic differences in Angus steers divergently selected for residual feed intake. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 44, 441–452.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Robinson DL, Oddy VH
(2004) Genetic parameters for feed efficiency, fatness, muscle area and feeding behaviour of feedlot finished beef cattle. Livestock Production Science 90, 255–270.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Russel AJF,
Doney JM, Gunn RG
(1969) Subjective assessment of body fat in live sheep. Journal of Agricultural Science (Cambridge) 72, 451–454.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Tulloh NM
(1961) Behaviour of cattle in yards. II. A study in temperament. Animal Behaviour 9, 25–30.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Voisinet BD,
Grandin T,
Tatum JD,
O’Connor SF, Struthers JJ
(1997) Feedlot cattle with calm temperaments have higher average daily gains than cattle with excitable temperaments. Journal of Animal Science 75, 892–896.
|
CAS |
PubMed |
Wynn PC
(1994) The influence of stress on animal productivity. Proceedings of the Australian Society of Animal Production 20, 65–66.
