The ability of ewes with lambs to learn a virtual fencing system.

The Nofence technology is a GPS-based virtual fencing system designed to keep sheep within predefined borders, without using physical fences. Sheep wearing a Nofence collar receive a sound signal when crossing the virtual border and a weak electric shock if continuing to walk out from the virtual enclosure. Two experiments testing the functionality of the Nofence system and a new learning protocol is described. In Experiment 1, nine ewes with their lambs were divided into groups of three and placed in an experimental enclosure with one Nofence border. During 2 days, there was a physical fence outside the border, during Day 3 the physical fence was removed and on Day 4, the border was moved to the other end of the enclosure. The sheep received between 6 and 20 shocks with an average of 10.9±2.0 (mean±SE) per ewe during all 4 days. The number of shocks decreased from 4.38±0.63 on Day 3 (when the physical fence was removed) to 1.5±0.71 on Day 4 (when the border was moved). The ewes spent on average 3%, 6%, 46% and 9% of their time outside the border on Days 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. In Experiment 2, 32 ewes, with and without lambs, were divided into groups of eight and placed in an experimental enclosure. On Day 1, the enclosure was fenced with three physical fences and one virtual border, which was then increased to two virtual borders on Day 2. To continue to Day 3, when there was supposed to be three virtual borders on the enclosure, at least 50% of the ewes in a group should have received a maximum of four shocks on Day 2. None of the groups reached this learning criterion and the experiment ended after Day 2. The sheep received 4.1±0.32 shocks on Day 1 and 4.7±0.28 shocks on Day 2. In total, 71% of the ewes received the maximum number of five shocks on Day 1 and 77% on Day 2. The individual ewes spent between 0% and 69.5% of Day 1 in the exclusion zone and between 0% and 64% on Day 2. In conclusion, it is too challenging to ensure an efficient learning and hence, animal welfare cannot be secured. There were technical challenges with the collars that may have affected the results. The Nofence prototype was unable to keep the sheep within the intended borders, and thus cannot replace physical fencing for sheep.

Brain gene expression differences are associated with abnormal tail biting behavior in pigs.

Knowledge about gene expression in animals involved in abnormal behaviors can contribute to the understanding of underlying biological mechanisms. This study aimed to explore the motivational background to tail biting, an abnormal injurious behavior and severe welfare problem in pig production. Affymetrix microarrays were used to investigate gene expression differences in the hypothalamus and prefrontal cortex of pigs performing tail biting, pigs receiving bites to the tail and neutral pigs who were not involved in the behavior. In the hypothalamus, 32 transcripts were differentially expressed (P < 0.05) when tail biters were compared with neutral pigs, 130 when comparing receiver pigs with neutrals, and two when tail biters were compared with receivers. In the prefrontal cortex, seven transcripts were differently expressed in tail biters when compared with neutrals, seven in receivers vs. neutrals and none in the tail biters vs. receivers. In total, 19 genes showed a different expression pattern in neutral pigs when compared with both performers and receivers. This implies that the functions of these may provide knowledge about why the neutral pigs are not involved in tail biting behavior as performers or receivers. Among these 19 transcripts were genes associated with production traits in pigs (PDK4), sociality in humans and mice (GTF2I) and novelty seeking in humans (EGF). These are in line with hypotheses linking tail biting with reduced back fat thickness and explorative behavior.

Feather pecking behavior in laying hens: hypothalamic gene expression in birds performing and receiving pecks.

Feather pecking (FP) is a welfare and economic problem in the egg production sector. Beak trimming, the current method used to reduce FP, is also criticized. The present study used gene expression to explore the biological mechanisms underlying this behavior, which could lead to a greater understanding of the cause and a tool to mitigate the problem. White Leghorn hens performing and receiving FP, as well as neutral control birds, were identified on a commercial farm. Hypothalamic RNA from 11 peckers, 10 victims, and 10 controls was hybridized onto GeneChip Chicken Genome Arrays (Affymetrix Inc., Santa Clara, CA) to compare gene expression profiles in the different groups. Eleven transcripts corresponding to 10 genes differed significantly between the 3 groups (adjusted P < 0.05). Eight of these transcripts differed in the peckers compared with the controls, 1 was upregulated in the victims compared with the controls, and 6 differed significantly in the peckers compared with the victims. Additionally, 5 transcripts showed a trend (adjusted P < 0.1) to differ in the pecker-victim comparison. Some of the products of the differently expressed genes are involved in disorders, such as intestinal inflammation and insulin resistance, which fit well with the previously proposed hypothesis that FP is an abnormal foraging behavior. Other findings may also support the proposal that FP is linked to immune mechanisms and may serve as an animal model for obsessive compulsive disorder in humans. In conclusion, this study provides a gene list that may be useful in further research on the mechanisms behind FP.