Dairy cows' use of colour cues to discriminate between people

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0168-1591(99)00055-6Get rights and content

Abstract

The role of the colour of overalls as a cue used by cows to discriminate between people was studied in four experiments using a total of 66 Danish Friesian cows kept in tie-stalls. In all experiments, the average distance cows kept from the person was calculated from 12 scores during 1 min with the person standing in front of the cow. Experiment A. The distance cows (n=24) kept, from two unfamiliar people wearing red or yellow overalls, was tested. There was no difference in the distance the cows kept from the two people and the two colours (P>0.10). Experiment B. The distance cows (n=18) kept from an unfamiliar person wearing familiar coloured overalls (blue) was compared to when the same unfamiliar person was wearing red or yellow overalls. There was no effect due to the colour of the overalls (P>0.10). Experiment C. Cows (n=12) were handled repeatedly, by two handlers wearing overalls of the same colour. Each person handled six cows gently and six cows aversively. There was no significant difference in distance kept from the gentle and the aversive handler, after 11 treatments (P>0.10). Experiment D. Cows (n=12) were handled repeatedly by one person wearing either red or yellow overalls. The person wore one colour when handling the cows gently and the other colour when the cows were handled aversively. The cows kept a longer distance when the handler wore the colour worn during the aversive treatment than when the handler wore the colour worn during the gentle treatment (P<0.01). The cows also responded according to the colour of the clothes when worn by an unfamiliar person, although they kept a shorter distance from the unfamiliar person than to the handler.

Introduction

Aversive handling of farm animals, and the animals' resulting fear of people, can substantially reduce both the production and the welfare of the animals, and increase the risk of injury to the handlers (Hemsworth and Coleman, 1998). Aversive handling has been shown to reduce milk production in dairy cows (Seabrook, 1984; Breuer et al., 1997). Dairy cows from higher-producing herds allow people to approach them more closely (Seabrook, 1984; Hemsworth et al., 1995), while the presence of an aversive handler during milking can reduce milk yield by 10% (Rushen et al., 1997). Such fear of people as a result of aversive handling, presumably arises from the animal learning to associate aversive handling with the person performing the handling through classical conditioning (Hemsworth et al., 1993; De Passillé et al., 1996). Ideally, aversive handling of farm animals should be reduced to a minimum, but some aversive handling is usually unavoidable, e.g., during veterinary treatment. It is therefore important to understand the factors that might reduce the animals' tendency to become fearful of people, particularly of their normal caretaker, as a result of such treatment.

One important issue is the extent to which animals can discriminate between different persons as opposed to generalising their fear to all people. At a practical level, it would be advantageous if animals which had been handled aversively by one person would not generalise their fear to other people. On the other hand, attempts to tame animals by increased gentling (e.g., Boissy and Bouissou, 1988; Boivin et al., 1994) will be more successful if the animals do not strongly discriminate between different people but show a reduced fear to people in general (Hemsworth et al., 1993; Jones, 1994). Dairy calves (De Passillé et al., 1996) and dairy cows (Munksgaard et al., 1997) have been found to distinguish readily between people who handle them aversively and those who handle them gently. However, calves do not always discriminate between familiar and unfamiliar people (Arave et al., 1992; De Passillé et al., 1996).

The ability to discriminate between different people is likely to be enhanced if the animals have sufficient cues available (Hemsworth et al., 1993), and cattle and pigs have been shown to discriminate people by the colour of the clothes (De Passillé et al., 1996; Munksgaard et al., 1997; Tanida and Nagano, 1998).

The aim of this series of experiments was to examine in more detail the ability of dairy cows to discriminate between handlers based on the colour of the clothes worn. We examined whether: (1) cows respond differently to people according to the colour of the clothes worn; (2) cows react differently to people wearing unfamiliar colours rather than the colour of clothes normally worn by the stockpersons; (3) cows can learn to discriminate between two people wearing the same colour of clothes; (4) cows can learn to approach or avoid the same person based on the colour of clothes being worn.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

This research complied with the Danish Ministry of Justice Law Number 382 (June 10, 1987) and with Acts 739 (December 6, 1988) and 333 (May 18, 1990) concerning animal experimentation and care of experimental animals.

Experiment A

There was no significant effect due to the colour of the overalls (Table 2) and no significant differences between the two people (person 1=score 2.6 and person 2=score 2.7, SE 0.19, P>0.10) or between the four tests on the distance kept from the test person (Table 2). The distance scores for different people and different colours were moderately positively correlated (Table 3). None of the cows defecated or urinated during the tests.

Experiment B

There was no significant effect due to the colour of the

Discussion

When gentle and aversive treatments were consistently done in different coloured overalls, the cows learned to approach and avoid the same handler according to the colour of the overalls worn. However, cows had difficulty in learning to discriminate between two handlers when they wore same coloured overalls. Prior to any treatment, the cows did not respond differently to people according to the colour of the overalls worn.

The cows readily learned to approach or avoid the same person based on

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Gynther Nielsen and Erik Decker for technical assistance and to all the staff at the dairy barn for their help.

References (22)

  • Hemsworth, P.H., Coleman, G.J. 1998. Human–Livestock Interactions. The Stockperson and the Productivity and Welfare of...
  • Cited by (30)

    • Opportunities (and challenges) in dairy cattle cognition research: A key area needed to design future high welfare housing systems

      2022, Applied Animal Behaviour Science
      Citation Excerpt :

      In dairy cattle farming systems, cows interact with humans on a daily basis. It should be noted that cattle are able to discriminate between humans from an early age (de Passillé et al., 1996; Munksgaard et al., 1999; Rybarczyk et al., 2001). It is thus important to establish a good human-animal relationship from the very beginning of the calf’s life, which may even last for the entirety of the production cycle (Breuer et al., 2003; Rushen et al., 1999).

    • Behavioural reactivity of two lines of South African Merino sheep divergently selected for reproductive potential

      2021, Applied Animal Behaviour Science
      Citation Excerpt :

      Furthermore, ewes appeared to be able to differentiate between a familiar and an unfamiliar handler, as revealed by the higher frequency of bleats when exposed to the unfamiliar handler. This ability to distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar humans has been reported at several occasions in different livestock species (pigs: Tanida and Nagano, 1998; cattle: Munksgaard et al., 1999; ostriches: Muvhali et al., 2018; sheep: Boivin et al., 1998; Cannas et al., 2018) and is thus likely to have welfare and production implications. Within the context of ewe temperament, several studies have highlighted how the ability to cope with potentially stressful situations can influence maternal behaviourial repertoires at lambing (Kilgour and Szantar-Coddington, 1995; Pajor et al., 2010; Hough et al., 2013), and thus determine offspring behaviour, health and productivity (Dodd et al., 2012; Dwyer, 2014; Rooke et al., 2017).

    • Test of temperament in mink is influenced by a shelf in the front of the cage and the stimulus size rather than by features of the test person

      2020, Applied Animal Behaviour Science
      Citation Excerpt :

      We know that farm animals (e.g. horses and pigs) are able to discriminate between different persons due to earlier experiences with one or several persons (Nawroth et al., 2019). The animals might generalise this experience to other persons wearing the same type of clothes or colours, at least as demonstrated in cows (Munksgaard et al., 1999) and silver foxes (Bakken, 1993). Mink has been shown to discriminate between red, green, yellow and blue colours, with decreasing sensitivity (Gewalt, 1959 c.f. Dunstone, 1993).

    • Barren housing and negative handling decrease the exploratory approach in farmed mink

      2020, Applied Animal Behaviour Science
      Citation Excerpt :

      Previous experiences are – via associative learning – expected to result in reduced approach following negative handling and increased approach/exploratory behaviour following positive events. Studies on cows reported that they kept a longer distance to a handler associated with negative handling (repeated smacking) than to a handler associated with positive (gentle feeding by hand) short-term events (Munksgaard et al., 1997, 1999). In our study, we expected mink avoidance to be related to the valence of previous experiences (negative > neutral > positive) in a subsequent stick test.

    • Filial attachment in sheep: Similarities and differences between ewe-lamb and human-lamb relationships

      2015, Applied Animal Behaviour Science
      Citation Excerpt :

      There is no doubt that farm ungulates can discriminate between humans (reviews: Kendrick, 2008; Rushen et al., 2001). Visual cues have been studied the most and demonstrate that they associate the colours of clothes, height of the person, and even human facial cues with negative or rewarding experiences (Davis et al., 1998: sheep; Munksgaard et al., 1997; Munksgaard et al., 1999; Rybarczyk et al., 2001: cattle; Koba and Tanida, 2001 Tanida et al., 1994; Tanida and Nagano, 1998: pig). Sheep have excellent visual acuity and are therefore perfectly equipped to distinguish between individuals using this sense.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text