RESUMEN
In natural settings, newborn calves hide for several days before joining the herd. It is unclear whether dairy calves housed indoors would show similar hiding behaviour. This study aimed to describe the use of an artificial hide provided to calves during temporary separation from the dam and assess the effect it has on lying and sleep-like behaviour, as well as heart rate variability (HRV). Twenty-eight cow-calf pairs were randomly assigned to having a hide (n = 14), or no hide (n = 14). Hide use (n = 14), as well as lying and sleep-like behaviour (n = 28), were recorded continuously via video camera during the first hour after the dam was removed for morning milking on day three to seven. Heart rate and R-R intervals were recorded using Polar equine monitors for a subsample of 12 calves (n = 6 per treatment) on day six. Descriptive statistics were calculated for hide use. Wilcoxon Signed Rank tests were used to evaluate whether having a hide affected lying and sleep-like behaviours as well as HRV. Hide use decreased over days and was highly variable between calves. Lying behaviour did not differ between treatments. Duration of sleep-like behaviour was higher for calves without a hide compared to those with a hide. Calves with a hide tended to show signs of higher HRV and parasympathetic activity compared to calves without a hide. Results suggest that providing a hiding space to young calves may be beneficial during periods when the cow is removed from the pen for milking.
RESUMEN
Many wild animals perform hiding behaviours for a variety of reasons, such as evading predators or other conspecifics. Unlike their wild counterparts, farmed animals often live in relatively barren environments without the opportunity to hide. Researchers have begun to study the impact of access to hiding spaces ("hides") in farmed animals, including possible effects on animal welfare. The aims of this scoping review were to: 1) identify the farmed species that have been most used in research investigating the provision of hides, 2) describe the context in which hides have been provided to farmed animals, and 3) describe the impact (positive, negative or neutral/inconclusive) that hides have on animals, including indicators of animal welfare. Three online databases (CAB Abstracts, Web of Science, and PubMed) were used to search for a target population of farmed animals with access to hiding spaces. From this search, 4,631 citations were screened and 151 were included in the review. Fourteen animal types were represented, most commonly chickens (48% of papers), cattle (9%), foxes (8%), and fish (7%). Relatively few papers were found on other species including deer, quail, ducks, lobsters, turkeys, and goats. Hides were used in four contexts: at parturition or oviposition (56%), for general enrichment (43%), for neonatal animals (4%), or for sick or injured animals (1%). A total of 218 outcomes relevant to our objectives were found including 7 categories: hide use, motivation, and/or preference (47% of outcomes), behavioural indicators of affective state (17%), health, injuries, and/or production (16%), agonistic behaviour (8%), abnormal repetitive behaviours (6%), physiological indicators of stress (5%), and affiliative behaviours (1%). Hiding places resulted in 162 positive (74%), 14 negative (6%), and 42 neutral/inconclusive (19%) outcomes. Hides had a generally positive impact on the animals included in this review; more research is encouraged for under-represented species.
