Beef Cattle Preference and Usage of Environmental Enrichments Provided Simultaneously in a Pasture-Based Environment

Environmental enrichment can improve livestock welfare through increasing environmental complexity to promote a greater range of natural behaviours. However, there is limited understanding of the need for and impacts of enrichments for extensively managed beef cattle that can sometimes be kept in grassed paddocks devoid of additional natural and artificial features, i.e., ‘barren pastures’. This trial assessed which enrichments beef cattle preferred and utilised in a barren paddock environment. Eight groups of seven Angus steers housed on pastured paddocks devoid of natural or artificial features were observed during daylight hours for two days a week over a period of three weeks, after being presented with four enrichments simultaneously: a cattle brush, a piece of hanging rope, a tree stump, and a woodchip pile. Although enrichment use generally decreased over time, the brush, stump, and woodchip maintained a higher level of use than the rope, based on the frequency of interactions and number of displacements around the enrichments (both p < 0.001). This suggests that the brush, stump, and woodchip pile were more valuable resources to the cattle, allowing for grooming and lying behaviours, although oral manipulations also occurred on the stump, woodchip, and rope. The inclusion of these enrichments can increase the complexity of barren pasture environments and allow for the increased expression of natural behaviours, potentially contributing to improved welfare.

Measuring Calves' Usage of Multiple Environmental Enrichment Objects Provided Simultaneously

This study aims to assess calf usage of five potential enrichment devices provided simultaneously. We used 25 weaned Holstein-Friesian calves housed in groups of five (five replicates), and their behavior was recorded continuously with video cameras. This longitudinal observational study used a pen equipped with a mechanical and fixed brush, cowhide, and horizontal and vertical ropes. Data collected included how many visits each object received per day, the type of object usage, and the duration of the visits. Calves used all five objects at least once, and they used items more during the daytime than at night. Brushes were used mainly for grooming (e.g., rubbing or scratching), while ropes and cowhide for oral interactions (e.g., licking, chewing, and biting), most likely to lack oral stimulations that would naturally be satisfied by suckling and grazing at this age. The objects most frequently used were the mechanical brush and the horizontal rope, and they received the highest number of visits (214.9 and 154.9 bouts/day, respectively). The least chosen object was the stationary brush, which had the lowest number of visits (62.9 bouts/day). The provision of multiple enrichment objects for weaned calves should be considered as they may add complexity and novelty to barren environments.

Stationary brush use in naive dairy heifers

Weaned dairy heifers are often housed in environments with few appropriate outlets for grooming or oral manipulation. Our objective was to characterize brush use by naive heifers, including patterns over time. In phase 1, groups of 4 heifers (n = 13 groups, 146.4 ± 9.1 d old, mean ± standard deviation; SD) were introduced to a bedded pack pen with 4 wall-mounted brushes (25.4 × 6.0 cm with 3.8-cm-long bristles). On d 1, 2, and 6 of exposure, continuous video recordings were used to observe 2 focal heifers per group for brush use (oral manipulation, grooming, and the sum of total brush use; all averaged at the group level). Latency to use a brush upon entering the pen was 3.4 ± 4.9 min (mean ± SD; range: 0.1 to 17.8 min among individuals). Heifers used the brushes for oral manipulation (39.7 ± 17.5% of brush use, mean ± SD) and grooming (60.3 ± 17.5%), primarily of their heads (89.9 ± 5.4% of grooming). In phase 2, heifers were moved in pairs (n = 13 pairs/treatment) to freestall pens either with (brush treatment) or without (control) brushes mounted inside the stalls for the first 5 d of phase 2 (d 8-12 of the study); on the last day (d 13 of the study), brushes were provided in both treatments. On d 8 (brush treatment) and 13 (both treatments), one focal heifer/pen was recorded for the same behaviors as in phase 1. Linear mixed models were used to evaluate brush use patterns across days (phase 1: d 1, 2, and 6; phase 2 brush treatment: d 8 vs. 13) and between treatments on d 13. In phase 1, brush use was greatest on d 1 [45.9 min; 95% confidence interval (CI): 33.2-63.3 min, back-transformed from natural-log values], decreased on d 2 (25.0 min, 95% CI: 18.4-34.0 min), but then remained steady until d 6 (21.0 min, 95% CI: 15.4-28.5 min); the initial reduction in total brush use was due to changes in grooming, but oral manipulation remained relatively static. In phase 2, heifers in the brush treatment showed similar usage on d 8 versus d 13 (3.8 vs. 3.7 min, 95% CI: 1.9-6.8 vs. 1.9-6.5 min). Compared with heifers with continuous brush access on d 8-12, those in the control treatment showed more brush use on d 13, both for oral manipulation (6.6 vs. 2.5 min, 95% CI: 3.8-11.1 vs. 1.3-4.5 min) and grooming (3.5 vs. 1.2 min, 95% CI: 1.9-5.7 vs. 0.5-2.3 min). Our study is the first to characterize stationary brush use in weaned dairy heifers. We conclude that, despite lacking previous experience, heifers use brushes for both grooming and oral manipulation.

Effect of environmental enrichment devices on behavior of individually housed beef heifers

In research settings, certain experimental designs may require cattle to be housed individually. Individual housing of cattle may make the animals more susceptible to boredom and result the development of undesirable behaviors. The objective of this trial was to investigate the effects of different environmental enrichment devices (EED) on the behavior and feed intake of heifers. Twenty mixed-breed single-sourced heifers were used in a completely random design. Heifers were housed individually (3.05 m × 3.66 m) with the ability to have physical contact with adjacent heifers. Heifers were randomly assigned to one of the four EED treatments, including a jolly ball (JLY), a broom head (SRCH), a 182 cm 5-knot rope (RP), or a Pas-a-Fier roller (RLR). Behavior was recorded using 8 h long daily instantaneous scan sampling in 30 min intervals over three periods: 7 d prior to EED addition (PR), 7 d with EED (EDP), and 7 d after removing EED (PST). Standing, laying, eating, drinking, and exploratory behaviors were evaluated. Exploratory behaviors included: interaction with water trough, feed bunk, water pipe, pen gate, pen wall, EED, grooming, or allogrooming. Rumination behavior was also recorded during each observation time. Time standing and standing bouts were greatest for RP (P < 0.05), while JLY and RLR spent the most time lying down (P < 0.05). All heifers spent the majority of observation times lying down, followed by solely standing (P < 0.05). Heifers on the RP treatment interacted the most with their EED, followed by SRCH (P < 0.001). Rumination increased during EDP compared to PR (P < 0.001). These results suggest that a RP suspended from the ceiling in the pen may be used most frequently by individually housed beef heifers.

Herd-level infectious disease surveillance of livestock populations using aggregate samples

All sectors of livestock production are in the process of shifting from small populations on many farms to large populations on fewer farms. A concurrent shift has occurred in the number of livestock moved across political boundaries. The unintended consequence of these changes has been the appearance of multifactorial diseases that are resistant to traditional methods of prevention and control. The need to understand complex animal health conditions mandates a shift toward the collection of longitudinal animal health data. Historically, collection of such data has frustrated and challenged animal health specialists. A promising trend in the evolution toward more efficient and effective livestock disease surveillance is the increased use of aggregate samples, e.g. bulk tank milk and oral fluid specimens. These sample types provide the means to monitor disease, estimate herd prevalence, and evaluate spatiotemporal trends in disease distribution. Thus, this article provides an overview of the use of bulk tank milk and pen-based oral fluids in the surveillance of livestock populations for infectious diseases.

Calves Use an Automated Brush and a Hanging Rope When Pair-Housed

Simple Summary

Improving calf housing is growing in interest as standard management meets only the basic needs of calves. In an observational study, we found that young calves interacted with an automated brush and a rope when given the opportunity. There was less variation in how much calves preferred the brush to the rope. Some calves used the rope as much as or more than the brush. We suggest that rope is a feasible, cheap, and farmer-friendly environmental enrichment option for housed calves; nonetheless, provision of multiple enrichment options should be considered to encourage use and meet individual calf preferences.

Abstract

Calf housing often only meets the basic needs of calves, but there is a growing interest in providing enrichments. This study described the behaviour of calves when they were given the opportunity to interact with two commonly available enrichment items. Female and male calves (approximately 11 days old) were pair-housed in 8 identical pens fitted with an automated brush and a hanging rope. Frequency and duration of behaviours were recorded on 3 separate days (from 12:00 until 08:00 the following day. Calves spent equal time using the brush and rope (27.1 min/day), but there was less variation in the use of the brush as opposed to the rope (coefficient of variation, CV: 23 vs. 78%, respectively). Calves had more frequent (94 bouts, CV: 24%) and shorter (17.8 s/bout, CV: 24%) brush use bouts compared to fewer (38 bouts, CV: 43%) and longer (38.3 s/bout, CV: 53%) rope use bouts. There was a diurnal pattern of use for both items. Frequency of play was similar to rope use, but total time playing was 8% of rope and brush use. Variability among calves suggested that individual preference existed; however, the social dynamics of the pair-housed environment were not measured and therefore could have influenced brush and rope use. Multiple enrichment items should be considered when designing improvements to calf housing.

Cattle Production Systems: Ecology of Existing and Emerging Escherichia coli Types Related to Foodborne Illness

Shiga toxin–producing Escherichia coli (STEC), particularly STEC O157, cause rare but potentially serious human infections. Infection with STEC occurs by fecal-oral transmission, most commonly through food. Cattle are the most important reservoir for human STEC exposure, and efforts to control the flow of STEC through beef processing have reduced rates of human illness. However, further reduction in human incidence of STEC may require control of the pathogen in cattle populations. The ecology of STEC in cattle production systems is complex and explained by factors that favor (a) colonization in the gut, (b) survival in the environment, and (c) ingestion by another cattle host. Although nature creates seasonal environmental conditions that do not favor STEC transmission in cattle, human efforts to control STEC by environmental manipulation have not succeeded. Vaccines and direct-fed microbial products have reduced the carriage of STEC by cattle, and other interventions are under investigation.