FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Animals (Basel) / Can Sound Alone Act as a Virtual Barrier for Horses? A Preli...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2022; 12(22); doi: 10.3390/ani12223151

Can Sound Alone Act as a Virtual Barrier for Horses? A Preliminary Study.

Abstract: Virtual fencing is an innovative alternative to conventional fences. Different systems have been studied, including electric-impulse-free systems. We tested the potential of self-applied acoustic stimulus in deterring the horses from further movement. Thirty warmblood horses were individually introduced to a designated corridor leading toward a food reward (variant F) or a familiar horse (variant S). As the subject reached a distance of 30, 15 or 5 m from a finish line, an acute alarming sound was played. Generally, a sudden and unknown sound was perceived by horses as a threat causing an increase in vigilance and sympathetic activation. Horses' behaviour and barrier effectiveness (80% for F vs. 20% for S) depended on motivator (F/S), while the cardiac response indicating some level of stress was similar. The motivation for social interactions was too strong to stop the horses from crossing a designated boundary. Conversely, the sound exposure distance did not vary the barrier effectiveness, but it differentiated HRV responses, with the strongest sympathetic activation noted at a distance of 5 m. Thus, the moment of a sound playback has important welfare implications. Due to the limited potential of sound as a virtual barrier, auditory cues cannot be used as an alternative for conventional fencing.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2022-11-15 PubMed ID: 36428379PubMed Central: PMC9686701DOI: 10.3390/ani12223151Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research paper looks into whether sound can be used as a virtual fence, an innovative alternative to conventional types of fencing, for horses. The study found that while sound did elicit a reaction from the horses, it wasn’t enough to effectively deter the animals from crossing an intended boundary.

The Process

  • The researchers conducted tests on 30 warmblood horses individually. There were two variants of motivators for the horses: Food Reward (F) and a familiar horse (S).
  • A designated corridor was used which led to either the food reward or the familiar horse and as the subject (the horse) reached specific distances – 30, 15, or 5 meters – from the finish line, an acute alarming sound would play.

Behavioural Responses

  • Generally, a sudden and unknown noise is perceived by horses as a threat which increases their vigilance and triggers a sympathetic nervous system activation, which includes responses like increased heart rate and alertness.
  • The effectiveness of the sound barrier was found to be 80% for the food reward motivator and only 20% for the familiar horse motivator. This shows that the horses’ responses were highly dependent on the motivator (either food or a familiar horse).

Impact on Cardiac Response

  • The research also revealed that the horses’ cardiac response, which indicates stress, was similar irrespective of the motivator. This suggests that the sound caused some level of stress to the horses.
  • However, the stress levels varied depending on the distance from the sound source. When the sound exposure happened at a distance of 5 meters, the most intense activation of the sympathetic nervous system was observed, indicating high stress levels.

Implications and Conclusions

  • The moment at which the sound is played back has significant welfare implications for the horses, especially due to the associated stress levels.
  • Despite the reactions elicited by the sounds, the study concluded that sound alone does not have the potential to be used as an effective virtual barrier for horses. This means auditory cues cannot replace traditional fencing methods for containing horses.

Cite This Article

APA
Janicka W, Wilk I, Próchniak T, Janczarek I. (2022). Can Sound Alone Act as a Virtual Barrier for Horses? A Preliminary Study. Animals (Basel), 12(22). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12223151

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 12
Issue: 22

Researcher Affiliations

Janicka, Wiktoria
  • Department of Horse Breeding and Use, Faculty of Animal Sciences and Bioeconomy, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, 20-950 Lublin, Poland.
Wilk, Izabela
  • Department of Horse Breeding and Use, Faculty of Animal Sciences and Bioeconomy, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, 20-950 Lublin, Poland.
Próchniak, Tomasz
  • Institute of Biological Basis of Animal Production, Faculty of Animal Sciences and Bioeconomy, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, 20-950 Lublin, Poland.
Janczarek, Iwona
  • Department of Horse Breeding and Use, Faculty of Animal Sciences and Bioeconomy, University of Life Sciences in Lublin, 20-950 Lublin, Poland.

Grant Funding

  • project no. SD/61/ZiR/2022 / University of Life Sciences

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 47 references
  1. Marini D, Meuleman M.D, Belson S, Rodenburg T.B, Llewellyn R, Lee C. Developing an Ethically Acceptable Virtual Fencing System for Sheep. Animals 2018;8:33.
    doi: 10.3390/ani8030033pmc: PMC5867521pubmed: 29495478google scholar: lookup
  2. Markus S.B, Bailey D.W, Jensen D. Comparison of electric fence and a simulated fenceless control system on cattle movements. Livest. Sci. 2014;170:203–209.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2014.10.011google scholar: lookup
  3. Lee C, Campbell D.L.M. A Multi-Disciplinary Approach to Assess the Welfare Impacts of a New Virtual Fencing Technology. Front. Vet. Sci. 2021;8:637709.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2021.637709pmc: PMC7940360pubmed: 33708813google scholar: lookup
  4. Campbell D.L.M, Lea J.M, Farrer W.J, Haynes S.J, Lee C. Tech-Savvy Beef Cattle? How Heifers Respond to Moving Virtual Fence Lines. Animals 2017;7:72.
    doi: 10.3390/ani7090072pmc: PMC5615303pubmed: 28926989google scholar: lookup
  5. Bishop-Hurley G.J, Swain D.L, Anderson D.M, Sikka P, Crossman C, Corke P. Virtual fencing applications: Implementing and testing an automated cattle control system. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2007;56:14–22.
    doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2006.12.003google scholar: lookup
  6. Umstatter C, Brocklehurst S, Ross D.V, Haskell M.J. Can the location of cattle be managed using broadcast audio cues?. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013;147:34–42.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2013.04.019google scholar: lookup
  7. Lomax S, Colusso P, Clark C.E.F. Does Virtual Fencing Work for Grazing Dairy Cattle?. Animals 2019;9:429.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9070429pmc: PMC6680858pubmed: 31288490google scholar: lookup
  8. Marini D, Llewellyn R, Belson S, Lee C. Controlling Within-Field Sheep Movement Using Virtual Fencing. Animals 2018;8:31.
    doi: 10.3390/ani8030031pmc: PMC5867519pubmed: 29495364google scholar: lookup
  9. Campbell D.L.M, Haynes S.J, Lea J.M, Farrer W.J, Lee C. Temporary Exclusion of Cattle from a Riparian Zone Using Virtual Fencing Technology. Animals 2018;9:5.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9010005pmc: PMC6356224pubmed: 30583490google scholar: lookup
  10. Jouven M, Leroy H, Ickowicz A, Lapeyronie P. Can virtual fences be used to control grazing sheep?. Rangel. J. 2012;34:111–123.
    doi: 10.1071/RJ11044google scholar: lookup
  11. Herlin A, Brunberg E, Hultgren J, Högberg N, Rydberg A, Skarin A. Animal Welfare Implications of Digital Tools for Monitoring and Management of Cattle and Sheep on Pasture. Animals 2021;11:829.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11030829pmc: PMC8000582pubmed: 33804235google scholar: lookup
  12. Umstatter C, Ross D, Haskell M.J. Audio approaches in Virtual Fencing. In: Lokhorst C., Berckmans D., editors. Precision Livestock Farming ’11. Czech Centre for Science and Society; Prague, Czech Republic: 2011. pp. 177–182.
  13. Butler Z, Corke P, Peterson R, Rus D. Virtual Fences for Controlling Cows. Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Conference on Robotics 8 Automation; New Orleans, LA, USA. 26 April–1 May 2004.
  14. Umstatter C, Tailleur C, Ross D, Haskell M.J. Could virtual fences work without giving cows electric shocks?. In: Lokhorst C., Groot Koerkamp P.W.G., editors. Precision Livestock Farming ’09. Wageningen Academic Publishers; Wageningen, The Netherlands: 2009. pp. 161–168.
  15. Butler Z, Corke P, Peterson R, Rus D. From Robots to Animals: Virtual Fences for Controlling Cattle. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2006;25:485–508.
    doi: 10.1177/0278364906065375google scholar: lookup
  16. Umstatter C. The evolution of virtual fences: A review. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2011;75:10–22.
    doi: 10.1016/j.compag.2010.10.005google scholar: lookup
  17. Janicka W, Wilk I. Praktyczne znaczenie badań nad behawiorem antydrapieżniczym w utrzymywaniu zwierząt gospodarskich (Practical importance of anti-predatory behavior research in keeping farm animals). Med. Weter. 2022;78:126–132.
    doi: 10.21521/mw.6624google scholar: lookup
  18. Marliani G, Sprocatti I, Schiavoni G, Bellodi A, Accorsi P.A. Evaluation of Horses’ Daytime Activity Budget in a Model of Ethological Stable: A Case Study in Italy. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 2021;24:200–213.
    doi: 10.1080/10888705.2020.1857252pubmed: 33353417google scholar: lookup
  19. Cooper J.J, Albentosa M.J. Behavioural adaptation in the domestic horse: Potential role of apparently abnormal responses including stereotypic behaviour. Livest. Prod. Sci. 2005;92:177–182.
    doi: 10.1016/j.livprodsci.2004.11.017google scholar: lookup
  20. Squibb K, Griffin K, Favier R, Ijichi C. Poker Face: Discrepancies in behaviour and affective states in horses during stressful handling procedures. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018;202:34–38.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2018.02.003google scholar: lookup
  21. Rørvang M.V, Nielsen B.L, McLean A.N. Sensory Abilities of Horses and Their Importance for Equitation Science. Front. Vet. Sci. 2020;7:663.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2020.00633pmc: PMC7509108pubmed: 33033724google scholar: lookup
  22. Janczarek I, Stachurska A, Kędzierski W, Wiśniewska A, Ryżak M, Kozioł A. The intensity of physiological and behavioral responses of horses to predator vocalizations. BMC Vet. Res. 2020;16:431.
    doi: 10.1186/s12917-020-02643-6pmc: PMC7653799pubmed: 33167961google scholar: lookup
  23. Heffner H.E, Heffner R.S. The Evolution of Mammalian Sound Localization. Acoust. Today. 2016;12:20–27.
  24. Barrera J.P, Chong L, Judy K.N, Blumstein D.T. Reliability of public information: Predators provide more information about risk than conspecifics. Anim. Behav. 2011;81:779–787.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2011.01.010google scholar: lookup
  25. Adcock S.J.J, Tuckerm C.B. Naïve domestic Bos taurus calves recognize the scent of a canine predator. Anim. Behav. 2020;164:173–180.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2020.04.009google scholar: lookup
  26. Arnould C, Malosse C, Signoret J.-P, Descoins C. Which chemical constituents from dog feces are involved in its food repellent effect in sheep?. J. Chem. Ecol. 1998;24:559–576.
    doi: 10.1023/A:1022321104758google scholar: lookup
  27. Janczarek I, Wiśniewska A, Chruszczewski M.H, Tkaczyk E, Górecka– Bruzda A. Social Behaviour of Horses in Response to Vocalisations of Predators. Animals 2020;10:2331.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10122331pmc: PMC7764477pubmed: 33302443google scholar: lookup
  28. Apfelbach R, Blanchard C.D, Blanchard R.J, Hayes R.A, McGregor I.S. The effects of predator odors in mammalian prey species: A review of field and laboratory studies. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2005;29:1123–1144.
    doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2005.05.005pubmed: 16085312google scholar: lookup
  29. Aflitto N.C, Hofstetter R.W. Use of acoustics to deter bark beetles from entering tree material. Pest Manag. Sci. 2014;70:1808–1814.
    doi: 10.1002/ps.3720pubmed: 24376044google scholar: lookup
  30. Frid A, Dill L. Human–caused Disturbance Stimuli as a Form of Predation Risk. Conserv. Ecol. 2002;6:11.
    doi: 10.5751/ES-00404-060111google scholar: lookup
  31. Janicka W, Wilk I, Ryżak M. Horses’ perception of a threat posed by sounds of different origin. Med. Weter. 2022;78:401–4213.
    doi: 10.21521/mw.6672google scholar: lookup
  32. Rochais C, Henry S, Hausberger M. Spontaneous attention–capture by auditory distractors as predictor of distractibility: A study of domestic horses (Equus caballus). Sci. Rep. 2017;7:15283.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-15654-5pmc: PMC5681571pubmed: 29127367google scholar: lookup
  33. Christensen J.W, Keeling L.J, Nielsen B.L. Responses of horses to novel visual, olfactory and auditory stimuli. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005;93:53–65.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2005.06.017google scholar: lookup
  34. Seamana S.C, Davidson H.P.B, Waran N.K. How reliable is temperament assessment in the domestic horse (Equus caballus)?. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2002;78:175–191.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00095-3google scholar: lookup
  35. Stomp N, Leroux M, Cellier M, Henry S, Hausberger M, Lemasson A. Snort acoustic structure codes for positive emotions in horses. Sci. Nat. 2018;105:57.
    doi: 10.1007/s00114-018-1582-9pubmed: 30291452google scholar: lookup
  36. Laborde S, Mosley E, Thayer J.F. Heart rate variability and cardiac vagal tone in psychophysiological research—Recommendations for experiment planning, data analysis, and data reporting. Front. Psychol. 2017;8:213.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00213pmc: PMC5316555pubmed: 28265249google scholar: lookup
  37. von Borell E, Langbein J, Després G, Hansen S, Leterrier C, Marchant-Forde J, Marchant-Forde R, Minero M, Mohr E, Prunier A. Heart rate variability as a measure of autonomic regulation of cardiac activity for assessing stress and welfare in farm animals—A review. Physiol. Behav. 2007;92:293–316.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.01.007pubmed: 17320122google scholar: lookup
  38. Mendonça T, Bienboire-Frosini C, Kowalczyk I, Leclercq J, Arroub S, Pageat P. Equine Activities Influence Horses’ Responses to Different Stimuli: Could This Have an Impact on Equine Welfare?. Animals 2019;9:290.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9060290pmc: PMC6616897pubmed: 31146422google scholar: lookup
  39. Yarnell K, Hall C, Royle C, Walker S.L. Domesticated horses differ in their behavioural and physiological responses to isolated and group housing. Physiol. Behav. 2015;143:51–57.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.02.040pubmed: 25725117google scholar: lookup
  40. Søndergaard E, Jensen M.B, Nicol H.J. Motivation for social contact in horses measured by operant conditioning. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011;132:131–137.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2011.04.007google scholar: lookup
  41. Christensen J.W, Rundgren M. Predator odour per se does not frighten domestic horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008;112:136–145.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.08.003google scholar: lookup
  42. Scopa C, Palagi E, Sighieri C, Baragli P. Physiological outcomes of calming behaviors support the resilience hypothesis in horses. Sci. Rep. 2018;8:17501.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-35561-7pmc: PMC6269543pubmed: 30504840google scholar: lookup
  43. Ricci–Bonot C, Romero T, Nicol C, Mills D. Social buffering in horses is influenced by context but not by the familiarity and habituation of a companion. Sci. Rep. 2021;11:8862.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-88319-zpmc: PMC8065151pubmed: 33893366google scholar: lookup
  44. Christensen J.W, Malmkvist J, Nielsen B.L, Keeling L.J. Effects of a calm companion on fear reactions in naïve test horses. Equine Vet. J. 2008;40:46–50.
    doi: 10.2746/042516408X245171pubmed: 18083659google scholar: lookup
  45. Safryghin A, Hebesberger D.V, Wascher C.A.F. Testing for Behavioral and Physiological Responses of Domestic Horses (Equus caballus) Across Different Contexts–Consistency Over Time and Effects of Context. Front. Psychol. 2019;10:849.
    doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00849pmc: PMC6482254pubmed: 31057468google scholar: lookup
  46. Lee J, Floyd T, Erb H, Houpt K. Preference and demand for exercise in stabled horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011;130:91–100.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2011.01.001google scholar: lookup
  47. Lenoir A, Trachsel D.S, Younes M, Barrey E, Robert C. Agreement between Electrocardiogram and Heart Rate Meter Is Low for the Measurement of Heart Rate Variability during Exercise in Young Endurance Horses. Front. Vet. Sci. 2017;4:170.
    doi: 10.3389/fvets.2017.00170pmc: PMC5650972pubmed: 29090214google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.