4.6 Article

Separation from the Dam Causes Negative Judgement Bias in Dairy Calves

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098429

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. CAPES (Coordenacao de aperfeicoamento de pessoal de nivel superior)
  3. ELAP (Emerging Leaders in the Americas Program)
  4. CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifcco e Tecnologico)
  5. CNPq [304123/2012-9]
  6. BBSRC [BB/J004197/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  7. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/J004197/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Negative emotional states in humans are associated with a negative (pessimistic) response bias towards ambiguous cues in judgement tasks. Every mammalian young is eventually weaned; this period of increasing nutritional and social independence from the dam is associated with a pronounced behavioural response, especially when weaning is abrupt as commonly occurs in farm animals. The aim of the current study was to test the effect of separation from the cow on the responses of dairy calves in a judgement task. Thirteen Holstein calves were reared with their dams and trained to discriminate between red and white colours displayed on a computer monitor. These colours predicted reward or punishment outcomes using a go/no-go task. A reward was provided when calves approached the white screen and calves were punished with a timeout when they approached the red screen. Calves were then tested with non-reinforced ambiguous probes (screen colours intermediate to the two training colours). GO responses to these probes averaged (6 SE) 72 +/- 3.6 % before separation but declined to 62 +/- 3.6 % after separation from the dam. This bias was similar to that shown by calves experiencing pain in the hours after hot-iron dehorning. These results provide the first evidence of a pessimistic judgement bias in animals following maternal separation and are indicative of low mood.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据