FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Biology letters2010; 7(2); 177-180; doi: 10.1098/rsbl.2010.0979

Differential outcomes of unilateral interferences at birth.

Abstract: Behavioural modifications, including modifications of emotional reactivity, can occur following early experience such as handling (manual rubbing). Here, we investigated the effects of unilateral tactile stimulation at an early stage on emotional reactions later on. We handled newborn foals intensively on one side of their body. This early unilateral tactile experience had medium-term effects: the reactions of foals to a human approach, when they were 10 days old, differed according to the side stimulated at birth. Fewer right-handled foals accepted contact with humans, they delayed first contact longer and they evaded approaching humans sooner than did non-handled and left-handled foals. These results raise questions concerning the organization of neonatal care in animals and humans.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2010-11-17 PubMed ID: 21084335PubMed Central: PMC3061188DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2010.0979Google 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
  • Research Support
  • Non-U.S. Gov't

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 studies the effects of early tactile stimulation on one side of newborn foals and its influence on their later reactions to human approach. Results revealed that the side of the body that was handled affected the foals’ emotional responses, raising questions about neonatal care practices.

Research Objective

  • The aim of this research was to investigate the impact of unilateral tactile stimulation on newborn foals. More specifically, the researchers wanted to understand how such stimulation would affect the animals’ later responses to human approach.

Methodology

  • The researchers subjected newborn foals to intensive handling on one side of their body shortly after birth. In other words, the foals received manual rubbing on either the right or left side of their bodies.

Research Findings

  • The study found that unilateral tactile stimulation at an early age had a variety of medium-term effects on the foals, specifically their reactions to a human approach at 10 days old.
  • The study demonstrated a difference in response depending on which side of the body was handled at birth.
  • It was observed that right-handled foals were less willing to accept human contact, they delayed the first contact longer and began evading humans earlier compared to the foals that were not handled at all or only handled on their left side.

Implications of the Research

  • The results of this study lead to questions regarding the practices surrounding neonatal care both in animals and in humans, suggesting that possible modifications in these practices might be required.
  • These findings underline the importance of early life experiences and their potential impacts on behavioural development and emotional reactivity.

Cite This Article

APA
de Boyer des Roches A, Durier V, Richard-Yris MA, Blois-Heulin C, Ezzaouïa M, Hausberger M, Henry S. (2010). Differential outcomes of unilateral interferences at birth. Biol Lett, 7(2), 177-180. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2010.0979

Publication

Biology letters
ISSN: 1744-957X
NlmUniqueID: 101247722
Country: England
Language: English
Volume: 7
Issue: 2
Pages: 177-180

Researcher Affiliations

de Boyer des Roches, Alice
  • UMR 6552 Ethologie Animale et Humaine, CNRS-Université de Rennes 1, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France.
Durier, Virginie
    Richard-Yris, Marie-Annick
      Blois-Heulin, Catherine
        Ezzaouïa, Mohammed
          Hausberger, Martine
            Henry, Severine

              MeSH Terms

              • Animals
              • Animals, Newborn
              • Emotions
              • Female
              • Handling, Psychological
              • Horses / physiology
              • Horses / psychology
              • Male
              • Physical Stimulation
              • Time Factors

              References

              This article includes 20 references
              1. Chapillon P, Patin V, Roy V, Vincent A, Caston J. Effects of pre- and postnatal stimulation on developmental, emotional, and cognitive aspects in rodents: a review.. Dev Psychobiol 2002 Dec;41(4):373-87.
                pubmed: 12430161doi: 10.1002/dev.10066google scholar: lookup
              2. Rogers LJ. Development and function of lateralization in the avian brain.. Brain Res Bull 2008 Jun 15;76(3):235-44.
                doi: 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2008.02.001doi: 10.1016/j.brainresbull.2008.02.001pubmed: 18498936google scholar: lookup
              3. Denenberg VH. Hemispheric laterality in animals and the effects of early experience. Behav. Brain Sci. 1981 4, 1–21.
                doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00007330doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00007330google scholar: lookup
              4. Demaree HA, Everhart DE, Youngstrom EA, Harrison DW. Brain lateralization of emotional processing: historical roots and a future incorporating "dominance".. Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev 2005 Mar;4(1):3-20.
                doi: 10.1177/1534582305276837doi: 10.1177/1534582305276837pubmed: 15886400google scholar: lookup
              5. Hepper PG, Wells DL, Lynch C. Prenatal thumb sucking is related to postnatal handedness.. Neuropsychologia 2005;43(3):313-5.
                doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.08.009doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2004.08.009pubmed: 15707608google scholar: lookup
              6. Rönnqvist L, Hopkins B. Head position preference in the human newborn: a new look.. Child Dev 1998 Feb;69(1):13-23.
                pubmed: 9499553doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06129.xgoogle scholar: lookup
              7. Hammer M, Turkewitz G. A sensory basis for the lateral difference in the newborn infant's response to somesthetic stimulation.. J Exp Child Psychol 1974 Oct;18(2):304-12.
                doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(74)90110-6doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(74)90110-6pubmed: 4427098google scholar: lookup
              8. Henry S, Richard-Yris MA, Tordjman S, Hausberger M. Neonatal handling affects durably bonding and social development.. PLoS One 2009;4(4):e5216.
                doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005216doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005216pmc: PMC2662428pubmed: 19352503google scholar: lookup
              9. Henry S, Richard-Yris MA, Hausberger M. Influence of various early human-foal interferences on subsequent human-foal relationship.. Dev Psychobiol 2006 Dec;48(8):712-8.
                doi: 10.1002/dev.20189doi: 10.1002/dev.20189pubmed: 17111402google scholar: lookup
              10. Austin NP, Rogers LJ. Asymmetry of flight and escape turning responses in horses.. Laterality 2007 Sep;12(5):464-74.
                pubmed: 17712716doi: 10.1080/13576500701495307google scholar: lookup
              11. Basile M, Boivin S, Boutin A, Blois-Heulin C, Hausberger M, Lemasson A. Socially dependent auditory laterality in domestic horses (Equus caballus).. Anim Cogn 2009 Jul;12(4):611-9.
                doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0220-5doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0220-5pubmed: 19283416google scholar: lookup
              12. McGreevy PD, Rogers LJ. Motor and sensory laterality in thoroughbred horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005 92, 337–352.
                doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2004.11.012doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2004.11.012google scholar: lookup
              13. De Boyer Des Roches A, Richard-Yris MA, Henry S, Ezzaouïa M, Hausberger M. Laterality and emotions: visual laterality in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) differs with objects' emotional value.. Physiol Behav 2008 Jun 9;94(3):487-90.
                pubmed: 18455205doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2008.03.002google scholar: lookup
              14. Henry S, Hemery D, Richard MA, Hausberger M. Human–mare relationships and behaviour of foals toward humans. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005 93, 341–362.
                doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2005.01.008doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2005.01.008google scholar: lookup
              15. Lippolis G, Bisazza A, Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G. Lateralisation of predator avoidance responses in three species of toads.. Laterality 2002;7(2):163-83.
                pubmed: 15513195doi: 10.1080/13576500143000221google scholar: lookup
              16. Sovrano VA, Bisazza A, Vallortigara G. Lateralization of response to social stimuli in fishes: a comparison between different methods and species.. Physiol Behav 2001 Sep 1-15;74(1-2):237-44.
                doi: 10.1016/S0031-9384(01)00552-2doi: 10.1016/S0031-9384(01)00552-2pubmed: 11564473google scholar: lookup
              17. Vallortigara G, Regolin L, Pagni P. Detour behaviour, imprinting and visual lateralization in the domestic chick.. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res 1999 Jan;7(3):307-20.
                doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(98)00033-0doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(98)00033-0pubmed: 9838175google scholar: lookup
              18. Zucca P, Sovrano VA. Animal lateralization and social recognition: quails use their left visual hemifield when approaching a companion and their right visual hemifield when approaching a stranger.. Cortex 2008 Jan;44(1):13-20.
                doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2006.01.002doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2006.01.002pubmed: 18387527google scholar: lookup
              19. Vallortigara G, Rogers LJ, Bisazza A, Lippolis G, Robins A. Complementary right and left hemifield use for predatory and agonistic behaviour in toads.. Neuroreport 1998 Oct 5;9(14):3341-4.
                doi: 10.1097/00001756-199810050-00035doi: 10.1097/00001756-199810050-00035pubmed: 9831474google scholar: lookup
              20. Farmer K, Krueger K, Byrne RW. Visual laterality in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) interacting with humans.. Anim Cogn 2010 Mar;13(2):229-38.
                doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0260-xdoi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0260-xpubmed: 19618222google scholar: lookup

              Citations

              This article has been cited 5 times.
              1. Rochais C, Lerch N, Gueguen L, Schmidlin M, Bonamy O, Grandgeorge M, Hausberger M. Horses' Tactile Reactivity Differs According to the Type of Work: The Example of Equine-Assisted Intervention. Vet Sci 2023 Feb 7;10(2).
                doi: 10.3390/vetsci10020130pubmed: 36851434google scholar: lookup
              2. Gueguen L, Lerch N, Grandgeorge M, Hausberger M. Testing individual variations of horses' tactile reactivity: when, where, how?. Naturwissenschaften 2022 Aug 11;109(5):41.
                doi: 10.1007/s00114-022-01811-ypubmed: 35951112google scholar: lookup
              3. Baragli P, Scopa C, Felici M, Reddon AR. Horses show individual level lateralisation when inspecting an unfamiliar and unexpected stimulus. PLoS One 2021;16(8):e0255688.
                doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255688pubmed: 34351986google scholar: lookup
              4. André V, Henry S, Lemasson A, Hausberger M, Durier V. The human newborn's umwelt: Unexplored pathways and perspectives. Psychon Bull Rev 2018 Feb;25(1):350-369.
                doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1293-9pubmed: 28462504google scholar: lookup
              5. Durier V, Henry S, Sankey C, Sizun J, Hausberger M. Locomotor Inhibition in Adult Horses Faced to Stressors: A Single Postpartum Experience May be Enough!. Front Psychol 2012;3:442.
                doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00442pubmed: 23112783google scholar: lookup
              Subscribe to our newsletter
              Join 99,780 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.