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) / Lateralised Behavioural Responses in Livestock to Environmen...
Animals : an open access journal from MDPI2023; 13(23); doi: 10.3390/ani13233663

Lateralised Behavioural Responses in Livestock to Environmental Stressors: Implications for Using Infrared Thermography to Assess Welfare Conditions.

Abstract: Lateralised behavioural responses to environmental stressors have become more frequently used as indicators of social welfare in animals. These lateralised behavioural responses are under the control of asymmetrical brain functions as part of the primary functions of most vertebrates and assist in primary social and survival functions. Lateralised behavioural responses originating from the left hemisphere are responsible for processing familiar conditions, while the right hemisphere is responsible for responding to novel stimuli in the environment. The forced lateralisation and side preference tests have been used to determine the visual lateralised behavioural responses in livestock to environmental stressors. Limb preference during movement has also been used to determine motor lateralisation. Although behavioural investigations in livestock have recorded lateralised behavioural responses to environmental stressors, there are still limitations in the implication of lateralisation to other conditions, such as restraint and invasive procedures. Thus, it is important to have a non-invasive measure for these lateralised behavioural responses. Recently, lateralised behavioural responses have been correlated with the use of infrared temperature of external body surfaces, such as the eyes and coronary bands of limbs. This review summarised the different forms of the lateralised behavioural responses in livestock, especially cattle and horses, to environmental stressors, and the association between these responses and the relevant external body surfaces' infrared temperature, with the purpose of improving the use of non-invasive measures in assessing welfare conditions in animals. The combination of the lateralised behavioural responses and infrared temperature of external body surfaces to environmental stressors could improve the assessment strategies of welfare conditions and the related additional husbandry interventions that could be applied to improve the welfare of farm animals.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2023-11-27 PubMed ID: 38067014PubMed Central: PMC10705742DOI: 10.3390/ani13233663Google 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
  • Review

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 article is about the analysis and implication of ‘lateralised behavioural responses’ in livestock, especially in cattle and horses, to determine their welfare conditions. The study explores various types of these responses and how they can be measured non-invasively by using infrared thermography of external body surfaces.

Understanding Lateralised Behavioural Responses

  • The term ‘lateralised behavioural responses’ refers to specific reactions displayed by an animal, which are controlled by either hemisphere of its brain. These responses are usually associated with the way animals perceive and respond to different environmental stimuli, hence serving as indicators of their welfare.
  • Usually, processes that are routine or familiar to the animals are managed by the left hemisphere. Conversely, unfamiliar conditions or novel stimuli responses are managed by the right hemisphere.
  • These responses are crucial for primary social and survival functions in most vertebrates, including livestock.

Assessing Lateralised Behavioural Responses

  • Researchers have developed tests, like the forced lateralisation and side preference tests, to measure visual reactions to environmental stressors in livestock.
  • To determine motor lateralisation, the researchers observe the animal’s limb preference during movement.
  • Despite the success in recording these responses to environmental factors, using them to assess other humane conditions, such as the animal’s state during restraint or invasive procedures, has shown limitations.

Infrared Thermography for Non-invasive Measurement

  • To circumvent the limitations of invasive measures, infrared thermography has been used recently. This tool can non-invasively calculate the external body surface’s temperature, such as eyes and the coronary bands of limbs. By comparing this data with known lateralised behavioural responses, a precise assessment of animal welfare is achievable.
  • The study states that exploring the link between these responses and the external body surface’s infrared temperature can improve using non-invasive measures to assess welfare conditions.

The Implication of the Study

  • The importance of this research lies in improving current strategies to assess welfare conditions in farm animals, which can lead to better farming practices and more humane treatment of animals.
  • The combined use of lateralised behavioural responses and infrared temperature readings could inform additional husbandry interventions to improve farm animal welfare.

Cite This Article

APA
Goma AA, Uddin J, Kieson E. (2023). Lateralised Behavioural Responses in Livestock to Environmental Stressors: Implications for Using Infrared Thermography to Assess Welfare Conditions. Animals (Basel), 13(23). https://doi.org/10.3390/ani13233663

Publication

Animals : an open access journal from MDPI
ISSN: 2076-2615
NlmUniqueID: 101635614
Country: Switzerland
Language: English
Volume: 13
Issue: 23

Researcher Affiliations

Goma, Amira A
  • Department of Animal Husbandry and Animal Wealth Development, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Alexandria University, Alexandria 21944, Egypt.
Uddin, Jashim
  • Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Raishahi, Rajshahi 6205, Bangladesh.
Kieson, Emily
  • Department of Research, Equine International, Boston, MA 02120, USA.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

This article includes 184 references
  1. Boissy A, Manteuffel G, Bak Jensen M, Oppermann Mor R, Spruijt B, Keeling LJ, Langbein J. Assessment of positive emotions in animals to improve their welfare.. Physiol. Behav. 2007;92:375–397.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.02.003pubmed: 17428510google scholar: lookup
  2. Duncan IJH. The changing concept of animal sentience.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2006;100:11–19.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.04.011google scholar: lookup
  3. Manteuffel G, Langbein J, Puppe B. From operant learning to cognitive enrichment in farm animal housing: Bases and applicability.. Anim. Welf. 2009;18:87–95.
    doi: 10.1017/S0962728600000105google scholar: lookup
  4. Mendl M, Paul ES. Consciousness, emotion and animal welfare: Insights from cognitive science.. Anim. Welf. 2004;13:S17–S25.
    doi: 10.1017/S0962728600014330google scholar: lookup
  5. Mellor DJ, Beausoleil NJ, Littlewood KE, Mclean AN, Mcgreevy PD, Jones B, Wilkins C. The 2020 Five Domains Model: Including Human—Animal Interactions in Assessments of Animal Welfare.. Animals 2020;10:1870.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10101870pmc: PMC7602120pubmed: 33066335google scholar: lookup
  6. McGlone JJ. What is animal welfare?. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics. 1993;6:26–36.
  7. Moberg GP. Using risk assessment to define domestic animal welfare.. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics. 1993;6:1–7.
  8. Knierim U, Van Dongen S, Forkman B, Tuyttens FAM, Špinka M, Campo JL, Weissengruber GE. Fluctuating asymmetry as an animal welfare indicator—A review of methodology and validity.. Physiol. Behav. 2007;92:398–421.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.02.014pubmed: 17448508google scholar: lookup
  9. Robins A, Phillips C. Lateralised visual processing in domestic cattle herds responding to novel and familiar stimuli.. Laterality 2010;15:514–534.
    doi: 10.1080/13576500903049324pubmed: 19629847google scholar: lookup
  10. Phillips CJC, Oevermans H, Syrett KL, Jespersen AY, Pearce GP. Lateralisation of behaviour in dairy cows in response to conspecifics and novel persons.. J. Dairy Sci. 2015;98:2389–2400.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2014-8648pubmed: 25648820google scholar: lookup
  11. Vallortigara G. Cerebral Lateralisation: A Common theme in the organization of the vertebrate brain.. Cortex 2006;42:5–7.
    doi: 10.1016/S0010-9452(08)70316-2pubmed: 16509103google scholar: lookup
  12. Frasnelli E, Vallortigara G, Rogers LJ. Left-right asymmetries of behaviour and nervous system in invertebrates.. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2012;36:1273–1291.
    doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.02.006pubmed: 22353424google scholar: lookup
  13. Vallortigara G, Rogers LJ. Survival with an asymmetrical brain: Advantages and disadvantages of cerebral lateralisation.. Behav. Brain Sci. 2005;28:575–589.
    doi: 10.1017/S0140525X05000105pubmed: 16209828google scholar: lookup
  14. Rogers LJ. Hand and paw preferences in relation to the lateralized brain.. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B. 2009;364:943–954.
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0225pmc: PMC2666076pubmed: 19064357google scholar: lookup
  15. Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G, Andrew RJ. Divided Brains: The Biology and Behaviour of Brain Asymmetries.. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, UK: 2013. p. 229.
    doi: 10.1002/ajpa.22368google scholar: lookup
  16. Vallortigara G, Chiandetti C, Rugani R, Sovrano VA, Regolin L. Animal cognition.. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 2010;1:882–893.
    doi: 10.1002/wcs.75pubmed: 26271784google scholar: lookup
  17. Rogers LJ. Lateralisation in Its Many Forms, and Its Evolution and Development.. In: Hopkins WD, editor. The Evolution of Hemispheric Specialization in Primates. American Society for Primatologists, Academic Press; London, UK: 2007.
    doi: 10.1016/S1936-8526(07)05002-6google scholar: lookup
  18. Denenberg VH. Behaviour al symmetry and reverse asymmetry in the chick and rat.. Behav. Brain Sci. 2005;28:597.
    doi: 10.1017/S0140525X05300100google scholar: lookup
  19. Lyons DM, Afarian H, Schatzberg AF, Sawyer-Glover A, Moseley ME. Experience-dependent asymmetric variation in primate prefrontal morphology.. Behav. Brain Res. 2002;136:51–59.
    doi: 10.1016/S0166-4328(02)00100-6pubmed: 12385789google scholar: lookup
  20. Clarke GM. Developmental stability–fitness relationships in animals: Some theoretical considerations.. In: Polak M, editor. Developmental Instability: Causes and Consequences. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2003. pp. 187–195.
  21. Zakharov VM. Linking developmental stability and environmental stress: A whole organism approach.. In: Polak M, editor. Developmental Instability: Causes and Consequences. Oxford University Press; Oxford, UK: 2003. pp. 402–414.
  22. MohanKumar SMJ, Balasubramanian P, Dharmaraj M, MohanKumar PS. Neuroendocrine Regulation of Adaptive Mechanisms in Livestock.. In: Sejian V, Naqvi S, Ezeji T, Lakritz J, Lal R, editors. Environmental Stress and Amelioration in Livestock Production. Springer; Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: 2012. pp. 263–298.
    doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-29205-7_11google scholar: lookup
  23. Phillips CJC, Llewellyn S, Claudia A. Laterality in bovine behaviour in an extensive partially suckled herd and an intensive dairy herd.. J. Dairy Sci. 2003;86:3167–3173.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)73919-8pubmed: 14594236google scholar: lookup
  24. Stub C, Ritskes-Hoitinga M, Thon R, Hansen CK, Hansen AK. Fluctuating asymmetry in mice and rats: Evaluation of the method.. Lab. Anim. 2002;36:193–199.
    doi: 10.1258/0023677021912343pubmed: 11943085google scholar: lookup
  25. Tuyttens FA, Maertens L, Van Poucke E, Van Nuffel A, Debeuckelaere S, Creve J, Lens L. Measuring fluctuating asymmetry in fattening rabbits: A valid indicator of performance and housing quality?. J. Anim. Sci. 2005;83:2645–2652.
    doi: 10.2527/2005.83112645xpubmed: 16230664google scholar: lookup
  26. Mendl M, Brooks J, Basse C, Burman O, Paul E, Blackwell E, Casey R. Dogs showing separation-related behaviour exhibit a ‘pessimistic’ cognitive bias.. Curr. Biol. 2010;20:R839–R840.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2010.08.030pubmed: 20937467google scholar: lookup
  27. Puppe B, Zebunke M, Düpjan S, Langbein J. Kognitiv-emotionale Umweltbewältigung beim Hausschwein—Herausforderung für Tierhaltung und Tierschutz.. Züchtungskunde 2012;84:307–319.
  28. Deng C, Rogers LJ. Social recognition and approach in the chick: Lateralisation and effect of visual experience.. Anim. Behav. 2002;63:697–706.
    doi: 10.1006/anbe.2001.1942google scholar: lookup
  29. Vallortigara G, Regolin L, Pagni P. Detour behaviour, imprinting and visual lateralisation in the domestic chick.. Cogn. Brain Res. 1999;7:307–320.
    doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(98)00033-0pubmed: 9838175google scholar: lookup
  30. Siniscalchi M, Quaranta A, Rogers LJ. Hemispheric specialization in dogs for processing different acoustic stimuli.. PLoS ONE 2008;3:e3349.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0003349pmc: PMC2553184pubmed: 18843371google scholar: lookup
  31. Teufel C, Ghazanfar AA, Fischer J. On the Relationship Between Lateralized Brain Function and Orienting Asymmetries.. Behav. Neurosci. 2010;124:437–445.
    doi: 10.1037/a0019925pubmed: 20695643google scholar: lookup
  32. Byrne RW, Bates LA. Sociality, evolution and cognition.. Curr. Biol. 2007;17:R714–R723.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2007.05.069pubmed: 17714665google scholar: lookup
  33. Coulon M, Deputte BL, Heyman Y, Richard C, Delatouche L, Baudoin C. Visual discrimination by heifers (Bos taurus) of their own species.. J. Comp. Psychol. 2007;121:198–204.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.121.2.198pubmed: 17516798google scholar: lookup
  34. Rosa Salva O, Regolin L, Mascalzoni E, Valortigara G. Cerebral and behaviour al asymmetries in animal social recognition.. Comp. Cogn. Behav. Rev. 2012;7:110–138.
    doi: 10.3819/ccbr.2012.70006google scholar: lookup
  35. Lee C, Café LM, Robinson SL, Doyle RE, Lea JM, Small AH, Colditz IG. Anxiety influences attention bias but not flight speed and crush score in beef cattle.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018;205:210–215.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2017.11.003google scholar: lookup
  36. Bouwknecht JA, Olivier B, Paylor RE. The stress-induced hyperthermia paradigm as a physiological animal model for anxiety: A review of pharmacological and genetic studies in the mouse.. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2007;31:41–59.
    doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2006.02.002pubmed: 16618509google scholar: lookup
  37. Proctor H, Carder G. Can changes in nasal temperature be used as an indicator of emotional state in cows?. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;184:1–6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.07.013google scholar: lookup
  38. Mader TL, Gaughan JB, Johnson LJ, Hahn GL. Tympanic temperature in confined beef cattle exposed to excessive heat load.. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2010;54:629–635.
    doi: 10.1007/s00484-009-0229-0pubmed: 19404683google scholar: lookup
  39. Lefcourt AM, Adams WR. Radiotelemetry measurement of body temperatures of feedlot steers during summer.. J. Anim. Sci. 1996;74:2633–2640.
    doi: 10.2527/1996.74112633xpubmed: 8923177google scholar: lookup
  40. Vickers LA, Burfeind O, von Keyserlingk MAG, Veira DM, Weary DM, Heuwieser W. Technical note: Comparison of rectal and vaginal temperatures in lactating dairy cows.. J. Dairy Sci. 2010;93:5246–5251.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2010-3388pubmed: 20965340google scholar: lookup
  41. Lees A, Lea J, Salvin H, Café L, Colditz I, Lee C. Relationship between rectal temperature and vaginal temperature in grazing Bos taurus heifers.. Animals 2018;8:156.
    doi: 10.3390/ani8090156pmc: PMC6162608pubmed: 30231512google scholar: lookup
  42. Lees AM, Lees JC, Lisle AT, Sullivan ML, Gaughan JB. Effect of heat stress on rumen temperature of three breeds of cattle.. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2018;62:207–215.
    doi: 10.1007/s00484-017-1442-xpubmed: 28918576google scholar: lookup
  43. Jenkins S, Brown R, Rutterford N. Comparing thermographic, EEG, and subjective measures of affective experience during simulated product interactions.. Int. J. Des. 2009;3:53–65.
  44. Johnson SR, Rao S, Hussey SB, Morley PS, Traub-Dargatz JL. Thermographic eye temperature as an index to body temperature in ponies.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2011;31:63–66.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2010.12.004google scholar: lookup
  45. Stewart MM, Wilson MT, Schaefer AL, Huddart F, Sutherland MA. The use of infrared thermography and accelerometers for remote monitoring of dairy cow health and welfare.. J. Dairy Sci. 2017;100:3893–3901.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2016-12055pubmed: 28259410google scholar: lookup
  46. Lowe GL, Sutherland MA, Waas JR, Schaefer AL, Cox NR, Stewart M. Physiological and behaviour al responses as indicators for early disease detection in dairy calves.. J. Dairy Sci. 2019;102:5389–5402.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2018-15701pmc: PMC7094567pubmed: 31005326google scholar: lookup
  47. Perez Marquez HJ, Ambrose DJ, Schaefer AL, Cook NJ, Bench CJ. Infrared thermography and behaviour al biometrics associated with estrus indicators and ovulation in estrus-synchronized dairy cows housed in tiestalls.. J. Dairy Sci. 2019;102:4427–4440.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2018-15221pubmed: 30879824google scholar: lookup
  48. Dai F, Cogi NH, Heinzl EUL, Dalla Costa E, Canali E, Minero M. Validation of a fear test in sport horses using infrared thermography.. J. Vet. Behav. Clin. Appl. Res. 2015;10:128–136.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2014.12.001google scholar: lookup
  49. Hall C, Burton K, Maycock E, Wragg E. A preliminary study into the use of infrared thermography as a means of assessing the horse’s response to different training methods.. J. Vet. Behav. Clin. Appl. Res. 2011;6:291–292.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2011.05.005google scholar: lookup
  50. 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
  51. Stewart M, Schaefer A, Haley D, Colyn J, Cook N, Stafford K, Webster J. Infrared thermography as a non-invasive method for detecting fear-related responses of cattle to handling procedures.. Anim. Welf. 2008;17:387–393.
    doi: 10.1017/S0962728600027895google scholar: lookup
  52. Stewart M, Verkerk GA, Stafford KJ, Schaefer AL, Webster JR. Non-invasive assessment of autonomic activity for evaluation of pain in calves, using surgical castration as a model.. J. Dairy Sci. 2010;93:3602–3609.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2010-3114pubmed: 20655429google scholar: lookup
  53. Stewart M, Webster JR, Stafford KJ, Schaefer AL, Verkerk GA. Technical note: Effects of an epinephrine infusion on eye temperature and heart rate variability in bull calves.. J. Dairy Sci. 2010;93:5252–5257.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2010-3448pubmed: 20965341google scholar: lookup
  54. Proctor HS, Carder G. Measuring positive emotions in cows: Do visible eye whites tell us anything?. Physiol. Behav. 2015;147:1–6.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.04.011pubmed: 25862928google scholar: lookup
  55. Valera M, Bartolomé E, Sánchez MJ, Molina A, Cook N, Schaefer A. Changes in Eye Temperature and Stress Assessment in Horses During Show Jumping Competitions.. J. Equine Vet. Sci. 2012;32:827–830.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jevs.2012.03.005google scholar: lookup
  56. Ijichi C, Griffin K, Squibb K, Favier R. Stranger danger? An investigation into the influence of human-horse bond on stress and behaviour.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018;206:59–63.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2018.05.034google scholar: lookup
  57. Fenner K, Yoon S, White P, Starling M, McGreevy P. The effect of noseband tightening on horses’ behaviour, eye temperature, and cardiac responses.. PLoS ONE 2016;11:e0154179.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154179pmc: PMC4854461pubmed: 27140187google scholar: lookup
  58. Ludwig N, Gargano M, Luzi F, Carenzi C, Verga M. Technical note: Applicability of infrared thermography as a non invasive measurements of stress in rabbit.. World Rabbit Sci. 2007;15:199–206.
    doi: 10.4995/wrs.2007.588google scholar: lookup
  59. Travain T, Colombo ES, Heinzl E, Bellucci D, Previde EP, Valsecchi P. Hot dogs: Thermography in the assessment of stress in dogs (Canis familiaris)—A pilot study.. J. Vet. Behav. 2015;10:17–23.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2014.11.003google scholar: lookup
  60. Uddin J, Phillips CJC, Goma AA, McNeill DM. Relationships between infrared temperature and Laterality.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2019;220:104855.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2019.104855google scholar: lookup
  61. Uddin J, Phillips CJC, Auboeuf M, McNeill DM. Relationships between body temperatures and behaviours in lactating dairy cows.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2021;241:105359.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105359google scholar: lookup
  62. Tucker CB, Cox NR, Weary DM, Špinka M. Laterality of lying behaviour in dairy cattle.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2009;120:125–131.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2009.05.010google scholar: lookup
  63. Morgante M, Vallortigara G. Animal welfare: Neuro-cognitive approaches.. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2009;8:255–264.
    doi: 10.4081/ijas.2009.s1.255google scholar: lookup
  64. Rogers LJ. Relevance of brain and behavioural lateralisation to animal welfare.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2010;127:1–11.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2010.06.008google scholar: lookup
  65. Rogers LJ. Does brain lateralisation have practical implications for improving animal welfare?. CAB Rev. Perspect. Agric. Vet. Sci. Nutr. Nat. Resour. 2011;6:1–10.
    doi: 10.1079/PAVSNNR20116036google scholar: lookup
  66. Mounaix B, Boivin X, Brule A, Schmitt I. Cattle Behaviour and the Human-Animal Relationship: Variation Factors and Consequences in Breeding.. Institut de l’Élevage; Paris, France: 2014. pp. 1–61.
  67. Villalba JJ, Provenza FD. Polyethylene glycol influences selection of foraging location by sheep consuming quebracho tannin.. J. Anim. Sci. 2002;80:1846–1851.
    doi: 10.2527/2002.8071846xpubmed: 12162651google scholar: lookup
  68. Launchbaugh KL, Howery LD. Understanding landscape use patterns of livestock as a consequence of foraging behaviour.. Rangel. Ecol. Manag. 2005;58:99–108.
    doi: 10.2111/03-146.1google scholar: lookup
  69. Wredle E, Rushen J, De Passile AM, Munksgarrd L. Training cattle to approach a feed source in response to auditory signals.. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 2004;84:567–572.
    doi: 10.4141/A03-081google scholar: lookup
  70. Kluever BM, Howery LD, Breck SW, Bergman DL. Predator and heterospecific stimuli alter behaviour in cattle.. Behav. Proc. 2009;81:85–91.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2009.02.004pubmed: 19429201google scholar: lookup
  71. 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;94:487–490.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2008.03.002pubmed: 18455205google scholar: lookup
  72. Adamczyk K, Górecka-Bruzda A, Nowicki J, Gumułka M, Molik E, Schwarz T, Klocek C. Perception of environment in farm animals. A review.. Ann. Anim. Sci. 2015;15:565–589.
    doi: 10.1515/aoas-2015-0031google scholar: lookup
  73. Hanggi EB, Ingersoll JF. Lateral vision in horses: A behaviour al investigation.. Behav. Proc. 2012;91:70–76.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2012.05.009pubmed: 22698758google scholar: lookup
  74. Vallortigara G. Comparative neuropsychology of the dual brain: A stroll through animals’ left and right perceptual worlds.. Brain Lang. 2000;73:189–219.
    doi: 10.1006/brln.2000.2303pubmed: 10856174google scholar: lookup
  75. Jozet-Alves C, Viblanc VA, Romagny S, Dacher M, Healy SD, Dickel L. Visual lateralisation is task and age dependent in cuttlefish, Sepia officinalis.. Anim. Behav. 2012;83:1313–1318.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2012.02.023google scholar: lookup
  76. Fraser D, Matthews LR. Preference and motivation testing.. In: Appleby MC, Hughes BO, editors. Animal Welfare. CAB International; New York, NY, USA: 1997. pp. 159–173.
  77. Farmer K, Krueger K, Byrne RW. Visual laterality in the domestic horse (Equus caballus) interacting with humans.. Anim. Cogn. 2010;13:229–238.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0260-xpubmed: 19618222google scholar: lookup
  78. Heffner HE. Auditory awareness.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998;57:259–268.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00101-4google scholar: lookup
  79. Heffner RS, Heffner HE. Hearing in large mammals: Sound-localization acuity in cattle (Bos taurus) and goats (Capra hircus). J. Comp. Psychol. 1992;106:107–113.
    doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.106.2.107pubmed: 1600717google scholar: lookup
  80. Phillips CJC. Cattle Behaviour.. Farming Press; Ipswich, UK: 1993. p. 58.
  81. Andrew RJ. Arousal and the causation of behaviour.. Behaviour. 1974;51:135–165.
    doi: 10.1163/156853974X00174pubmed: 4614790google scholar: lookup
  82. Rogers LJ. Eye and Ear Preferences.. In: Rogers L, Vallortigara G, editors. Lateralized Brain Functions. Volume 122. Humana Press; New York, NY, USA: 2017. Neuromethods.
    doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6725-4_3google scholar: lookup
  83. Scheumann M, Zimmermann E. Sex-specific asymmetries in communication sound perception are not related to hand preference in an early primate.. BMC Biol. 2008;6:3.
    doi: 10.1186/1741-7007-6-3pmc: PMC2266901pubmed: 18199316google scholar: lookup
  84. Waring GH. Horse Behaviour.. 2nd ed. Noyes Publications/William Andrew Publishing; Norwich, NY, USA: 2003. pp. 18–299.
  85. 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;12:611–619.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-009-0220-5pubmed: 19283416google scholar: lookup
  86. Pearson R, Pearson L. The Vertebrate Brain.. Academic Press; London, UK: 1976. p. 744.
  87. Ebbesson SE. On the organisation of the central visual pathways in vertebrates.. Brain Behav. Evol. 1970;3:178–194.
    doi: 10.1159/000125470pubmed: 5001240google scholar: lookup
  88. Hugdahl K. Lateralisation of cognitive processes in the brain.. Acta Psychol. 2000;105:211–235.
    doi: 10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00062-7pubmed: 11194413google scholar: lookup
  89. Ocklenburg S, Ströckens F, Güntürkün O. Lateralisation of conspecific vocalisation in non-human vertebrates.. Laterality 2013;18:1–31.
    doi: 10.1080/1357650X.2011.626561pubmed: 23231542google scholar: lookup
  90. Arave CW. Assessing sensory capacity of animals using operant technology.. J. Anim. Sci. 1996;74:1996–2009.
    doi: 10.2527/1996.7481996xpubmed: 8856456google scholar: lookup
  91. Waynert DF, Stookey JM, Schwartzkopf-Genswein KS, Waltz CS. The response of beef cattle to noise during handling.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1999;62:27–42.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00211-1google scholar: lookup
  92. Waiblinger S, Boivin X, Pedersen V, Tosi MV, Janczak AM, Visser EK, Jones RB. Assessing the human–animal relationship in farmed species: A critical review.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2006;101:185–242.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2006.02.001google scholar: lookup
  93. Pajor EA, Rushen J, De Passillé AMB. Dairy cattle’s choice of handling treatments in a Y-maze.. Appl. Anim. Behavi. Sci. 2003;80:93–107.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(02)00119-3google scholar: lookup
  94. Wackermannova M, Pinc L, Jebavy L. Olfactory Sensitivity in Mammalian Species.. Physiol. Res. 2016;65:369–390.
    doi: 10.33549/physiolres.932955pubmed: 27070753google scholar: lookup
  95. Boissy A, Terlouw C, Le Neindre P. Presence of cues from stressed conspecifics increases reactivity to aversive events in cattle: Evidence for the existence of alarm substances in urine.. Physiol. Behav. 1998;63:489–495.
    doi: 10.1016/S0031-9384(97)00466-6pubmed: 9523888google scholar: lookup
  96. Bouissou MF, Boissy A, Le Neindre P, Vessier I. The social behaviour of cattle.. In: Keeling LJ, Gonyou HW, editors. Social Behaviour in Farm Animals. CABI Publishing; New York, NY, USA: 2001. pp. 113–145.
  97. Brancucci A, Lucci G, Mazzatenta A, Tommasi L. Asymmetries of the human social brain in the visual, auditory and chemical modalities.. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2009;364:895–914.
    doi: 10.1098/rstb.2008.0279pmc: PMC2666086pubmed: 19064350google scholar: lookup
  98. Savic I, Berglund H. Right-nostril dominance in discrimination of unfamiliar, but not familiar, odours.. Chem. Sens. 2000;25:517–523.
    doi: 10.1093/chemse/25.5.517pubmed: 11015323google scholar: lookup
  99. Broman DA, Olsson MJ, Nordin S. Lateralisation of olfactory cognitive functions: Effects of rhinal side of stimulation.. Chem. Sens. 2001;26:1187–1192.
    doi: 10.1093/chemse/26.9.1187pubmed: 11705804google scholar: lookup
  100. Royet JP, Plailly J. Lateralisation of olfactory processes.. Chem. Sens. 2004;29:731–745.
    doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjh067pubmed: 15466819google scholar: lookup
  101. Andrew RJ, Rogers LJ. The nature of lateralisation in tetrapods.. In: Rogers LJ, Andrew RJ, editors. Comparative Vertebrate Lateralisation. Cambridge University Press; New York, NY, USA: 2002. pp. 94–125.
  102. McGreevy PD, Rogers LJ. Motor and sensory laterality in thoroughbred horses.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2005;92:337–352.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2004.11.012google scholar: lookup
  103. Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G, Bisazza A. From antenna to antenna: Lateral shift of olfactory memory recall by honeybees.. PLoS ONE 2008;3:e2340.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002340pmc: PMC2394662pubmed: 18523636google scholar: lookup
  104. Vallortigara G, Rogers LJ, Bisazza A. Possible evolutionary origins of cognitive brain lateralisation.. Brain Res. Rev. 1999;30:164–175.
    doi: 10.1016/S0165-0173(99)00012-0pubmed: 10525173google scholar: lookup
  105. Vallortigara G, Chiandetti C, Sovrano VA. Brain asymmetry (animal). Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 2011;2:146–157.
    doi: 10.1002/wcs.100pubmed: 26302006google scholar: lookup
  106. MacNeilage PF, Rogers LJ, Vallortigara G. Neuroscience origins of the left and right brain.. Sci. Am. 2009;301:60–67.
    doi: 10.1038/scientificamerican0709-60pubmed: 19555025google scholar: lookup
  107. Craig AD. Forebrain emotional asymmetry: A neuroanatomical basis?. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2005;9:566–571.
    doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2005.10.005pubmed: 16275155google scholar: lookup
  108. Siniscalchi M, Sasso R, Pepe AM, Vallortigara G, Quaranta A. Dogs turn left to emotional stimuli.. Behav. Brain Res. 2010;208:516–521.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2009.12.042pubmed: 20060016google scholar: lookup
  109. Kappel S, Mendl MT, Barrett DC, Murrell JC, Whay HR. Lateralized behaviour as indicator of affective state in dairy cows.. PLoS ONE 2017;12:e0184933.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0184933pmc: PMC5599055pubmed: 28910416google scholar: lookup
  110. Goma AA, Pearce GP, Uddin J, Rimon E, Davies H, Phillips CJC. A forced lateralisation test for dairy cows and its relation to their behaviour.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2018;207:8–19.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2018.06.008google scholar: lookup
  111. Austin NP, Rogers LJ. Lateralisation of agonistic and vigilance responses in Przewalski horses (Equus przewalskii). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2014;151:43–50.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2013.11.011google scholar: lookup
  112. Sankey C, Henry S, Clouard C, Richard-Yris MA, Hausberger M. Asymmetry of behaviour al responses to a human approach in young naive vs. trained horses.. Physiol. Behav. 2011;104:464–468.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2011.05.009pubmed: 21605580google scholar: lookup
  113. Esch L, Wöhr C, Erhard M, Krüger K. Horses’ (Equus caballus) laterality, stress hormones, and task related behaviour in innovative problem-solving.. Animals 2019;9:265.
    doi: 10.3390/ani9050265pmc: PMC6562608pubmed: 31121937google scholar: lookup
  114. Felici M, Reddon AR, Maglieri V, Lanatà A, Baragli P. Heart and brain: Change in cardiac entropy is related to lateralised visual inspection in horses.. PLoS ONE 2023;18:e0289753.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0289753pmc: PMC10409287pubmed: 37552685google scholar: lookup
  115. Farmer K, Krüger K, Byrne RW, Marr I. Sensory laterality in affiliative interactions in domestic horses and ponies (Equus caballus). Anim. Cogn. 2018;21:631–637.
    doi: 10.1007/s10071-018-1196-9pmc: PMC6097077pubmed: 29948296google scholar: lookup
  116. Kieson E, Goma AA, Medhat R. Tend and Befriend in Horses: Partner Preferences, Lateralisation and Contextualization of Allogrooming in Two Socially Stable Herds of Quarter Horse Mares.. Animals 2023;13:225.
    doi: 10.3390/ani13020225pmc: PMC9854972pubmed: 36670764google scholar: lookup
  117. Leliveld LMC, Langbein J, Puppe B. The emergence of emotional lateralisation: Evidence in non-human vertebrates and implications for farm animals.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013;145:1–14.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2013.02.002google scholar: lookup
  118. Briefer EF. Vocal expression of emotions in mammals: Mechanisms of production and evidence.. J. Zool. 2012;288:1–20.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7998.2012.00920.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  119. Briefer EF. Vocal contagion of emotions in non-human animals.. Proc. R. Soc. B. 2018;285:20172783.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2017.2783pmc: PMC5832712pubmed: 29491174google scholar: lookup
  120. Nickel R, Schummer A, Seiferle E. Lehrbuch der Anatomie der Haustiere [Handbook of Anatomy of Domestic Animals] Volume 1. Paul Parey Verlag; Berlin, Germany: 1968.
  121. Schmied C, Waiblinger S, Scharl T, Leisch F, Boivin X. Stroking of different body regions by a human: Effects on behaviour and heart rate of dairy cows.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008;109:25–38.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.01.013google scholar: lookup
  122. De Oliveira D, Keeling LJ. Routine activities and emotion in the life of dairy cows: Integrating body language into an affective state framework.. PLoS ONE 2018;13:e0195674.
    doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0195674pmc: PMC5931453pubmed: 29718937google scholar: lookup
  123. Ocklenburg S, Korte SM, Peterburs J, Wolf OT, Gu¨ntu¨rku¨n O. Stress and laterality—The comparative perspective.. Physiol. Behav. 2016;164:321–329.
    doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.06.020pubmed: 27321757google scholar: lookup
  124. Schoenbaum G, Chiba AA, Gallagher M. Neural encoding in orbitofrontal cortex and basolateral amygdala during olfactory discrimination learning.. J. Neurosci. 1999;19:1876–1884.
    doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.19-05-01876.1999pmc: PMC6782178pubmed: 10024371google scholar: lookup
  125. Armony JL. Current emotion research in behaviour al neuroscience: The role(s) of the amygdala.. Emot. Rev. 2013;5:104–115.
    doi: 10.1177/1754073912457208google scholar: lookup
  126. Janak PH, Tye KM. From circuits to behaviour in the amygdala.. Nature 2015;517:284–292.
    doi: 10.1038/nature14188pmc: PMC4565157pubmed: 25592533google scholar: lookup
  127. Young EJ, Williams CL. Valence dependent asymmetric release of norepinephrine in the basolateral amygdala.. Behav. Neurosci. 2010;124:633–644.
    doi: 10.1037/a0020885pubmed: 20939663google scholar: lookup
  128. Young EJ, Williams CL. Differential activation of amygdala Arc expression by positive and negatively valenced emotional learning conditions.. Front. Behav. Neurosci. 2013;7:191.
    doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00191pmc: PMC3852216pubmed: 24367308google scholar: lookup
  129. Murphy J, Arkins S. Equine learning behaviour.. Behav. Proc. 2007;76:1–13.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2006.06.009pubmed: 17400403google scholar: lookup
  130. Zucca P, Cerri F, Carluccio A, Baciadonna L. Space availability influence laterality in donkeys (Equus asinus). Behav. Proc. 2011;88:63–66.
    doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2011.06.012pubmed: 21741459google scholar: lookup
  131. Savin H. The Effects of Lateralisation on Detour-Based Problem Solving in Horses (Equus caballus). Master’s Thesis. University of Plymouth, School of Biomedical and Biological Sciences; Plymouth, UK: 2015. [(accessed on 1 August 2023)]. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/3512.
  132. Baragli P, Vitale V, Paoletti E, Sighieri C, Reddon AR. Detour behaviour in horses (Equus caballus). J. Ethol. 2011;29:227–234.
    doi: 10.1007/s10164-010-0246-9google scholar: lookup
  133. Proops L, McComb K. Cross-modal individual recognition in domestic horses (Equus caballus) extends to familiar humans.. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2012;279:3131–3138.
    doi: 10.1098/rspb.2012.0626pmc: PMC3385734pubmed: 22593108google scholar: lookup
  134. Marr I, Farmer K, Krüger K. Evidence for right-sided horses being more optimistic than left-sided horses.. Animals 2018;8:219.
    doi: 10.3390/ani8120219pmc: PMC6315450pubmed: 30469484google scholar: lookup
  135. Gabor V, Gerken M. Horses use procedural learning rather than conceptual learning to solve matching to sample.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2010;126:119–124.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2010.06.006google scholar: lookup
  136. McGreevy PD, Thomson PC. Differences in motor laterality between breeds of performance horse.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2006;99:183–190.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2005.09.010google scholar: lookup
  137. Larose C, Richard-Yris MA, Hausberger M, Rogers LJ. Laterality of horses associated with emotionality in novel situations.. Laterality 2006;11:355–367.
    doi: 10.1080/13576500600624221pubmed: 16754236google scholar: lookup
  138. Krueger K, Schwarz S, Marr I, Farmer K. Laterality in Horse Training: Psychological and Physical Balance and Coordination and Strength Rather Than Straightness.. Animals 2022;12:1042.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12081042pmc: PMC9028236pubmed: 35454288google scholar: lookup
  139. Schwarz S, Marr I, Farmer K, Graf K, Stefanski V, Krueger K. Does Carrying a Rider Change Motor and Sensory Laterality in Horses?. Animals 2022;12:992.
    doi: 10.3390/ani12080992pmc: PMC9027692pubmed: 35454239google scholar: lookup
  140. Byström A, Clayton HM, Hernlund E, Rhodin M, Egenvall A. Equestrian and biomechanical perspectives on laterality in the horse.. Comp. Exerc. Physiol. 2020;16:35–45.
    doi: 10.3920/CEP190022google scholar: lookup
  141. Ganskopp D. Free-ranging angora goats: Left- or right-handed tendencies while grazing?. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1995;43:141–146.
    doi: 10.1016/0168-1591(95)00558-Agoogle scholar: lookup
  142. Eberhart NL, Krawczel PD. The Effect of Hock Injury Laterality and Lameness on Lying Behaviour s and Lying Laterality in Holstein Dairy Cows.. Animals 2017;7:86.
    doi: 10.3390/ani7110086pmc: PMC5704115pubmed: 29149044google scholar: lookup
  143. Arave CW, Walters JL. Factors affecting lying behaviour and stall utilization of dairy cattle.. Appl. Anim. Ethol. 1980;6:369–376.
    doi: 10.1016/0304-3762(80)90137-6google scholar: lookup
  144. Bao J, Giller PS. Observations on the changes in behavioural activities of dairy cows prior to and after parturition.. Ir. Vet. J. 1991;44:43–47.
  145. Jones RB, Roper TJ. Olfaction in the domestic fowl: A critical review.. Physiol. Behav. 1997;62:1009–1018.
    doi: 10.1016/S0031-9384(97)00207-2pubmed: 9333194google scholar: lookup
  146. Sommerville BA, Broom DM. Olfactory awareness.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998;57:269–286.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(98)00102-6google scholar: lookup
  147. Tanaka T, Hashimoto A, Tanida H, Yoshimoto T. Studies on the visual acuity of sheep using shape—Discrimination learning.. J. Ethol. 1995;13:69–75.
    doi: 10.1007/BF02352565google scholar: lookup
  148. Zonderland JJ, Cornelissen L, Wolthuis-Fillerup M, Spoolder HAM. Visual acuity of pigs at different light intensities.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008;111:28–37.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.05.010google scholar: lookup
  149. Sugnaseelan S, Prescott NB, Broom DM, Wathes CM, Phillips CJC. Visual discrimination learning and spatial acuity in sheep.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2013;147:104–111.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2013.04.012google scholar: lookup
  150. Corballis MC. Of mice and men—And lopsided birds.. Cortex 2008;44:3–7.
    doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2007.10.001pubmed: 18387525google scholar: lookup
  151. Fenner K, Freire R, McLean A, McGreevy P. Behaviour al, demographic, and management influences on equine responses to negative reinforcement.. J. Vet. Behav. 2019;29:11–17.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jveb.2018.08.007google scholar: lookup
  152. Kikkers BH, Ózsvári L, Van Eerdenburg FJCM, Bajcsy ÁC, Szenci O. The influence of laterality on mastitis incidence in dairy cattle-preliminary study.. Acta Vet. Hung. 2006;54:161–171.
    doi: 10.1556/AVet.54.2006.2.3pubmed: 16841754google scholar: lookup
  153. Forsberg AM, Pettersson G, Ljungberg T, Svennersten-Sjaunja K. A brief note about cow lying behaviour—Do cows choose left and right lying side equally?. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008;114:32–36.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2008.02.008google scholar: lookup
  154. Lane A, Phillips C. A note on behavioural laterality in neonatal lambs.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2004;86:161–167.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2003.11.015google scholar: lookup
  155. Lanier JL, Grandin T, Green RD, Avery D, McGee K. The relationship between the reaction to sudden, intermittent movements and sounds, and temperament.. J. Anim. Sci. 2000;78:1467–1474.
    doi: 10.2527/2000.7861467xpubmed: 10875628google scholar: lookup
  156. Broucek J, Uhrincat M, Mihina S, Soch M, Mrekajova A, Hanus A. Dairy Cows Produce Less Milk and Modify Their Behaviour during the Transition between Tie-Stall to Free-Stall.. Animals 2017;7:16.
    doi: 10.3390/ani7030016pmc: PMC5366835pubmed: 28273810google scholar: lookup
  157. Bradshaw JL. Animal asymmetry and human heredity. Dextrality, tool use and language in evolution-10 years after Walker (1980). Br. J. Psychol. 1991;82:39–59.
    doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1991.tb02381.xpubmed: 2029604google scholar: lookup
  158. Wagnon KA, Rollins WC. Bovine laterality.. J. Anim. Sci. 1972;35:486–488.
    doi: 10.2527/jas1972.352486xpubmed: 5055767google scholar: lookup
  159. Grant RJ, Colenbrander VF, Albright JL. Effect of particle size of forage and rumen cannulation upon chewing activity and laterality in dairy cows.. J. Dairy Sci. 1990;73:3158–3164.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(90)79005-4pubmed: 2273146google scholar: lookup
  160. Mattachini G, Tamburini A, Zucali M, Bava L, Riva E, Provolo G, Sandrucci A. Relationships among lying and standing behaviour, body condition score and milk production in primiparous cows.. Ital. J. Anim. Sci. 2020;19:772–782.
    doi: 10.1080/1828051X.2020.1793695google scholar: lookup
  161. Hixson CL, Krawczel PD, Caldwell JM, Miller-Cushon EK. Behaviour al changes in group-housed dairy calves infected with Mannheimia haemolytica.. J. Dairy Sci. 2018;101:10351–10360.
    doi: 10.3168/jds.2018-14832pubmed: 30197142google scholar: lookup
  162. Eberhart NL, Storer JM, Caldwell M, Saxton AM, Krawczel PD. Behaviour al and physiologic changes in Holstein steers experimentally infected with Mannheimia haemolytica.. Am. J. Vet. Res. 2017;78:1056–1064.
    doi: 10.2460/ajvr.78.9.1056pubmed: 28836844google scholar: lookup
  163. Černý T, Večeřa M, Falta D, Chládek G. The effect of the season on the behaviour and milk yield of the czech fleckvieh cows.. Acta Univ. Agric. Silvic. Mendel. Brun. 2016;64:1125–1130.
    doi: 10.11118/actaun201664041125google scholar: lookup
  164. Boris LM. The food-borne ultimatum: Proposing federal legislation to create humane living conditions for animals raised for food in order to improve human health.. J. Law Health. 2011;24:285.
  165. D’Silva J. Adverse impact of industrial animal agriculture on the health and welfare of farmed animals.. Integr. Zool. 2006;1:53–58.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1749-4877.2006.00013.xpubmed: 21395992google scholar: lookup
  166. Gunderson R. From cattle to capital: Exchange value, animal commodification, and barbarism.. Crit. Sociol. 2013;39:259–275.
    doi: 10.1177/0896920511421031google scholar: lookup
  167. Fraser AF, Broom DM. Farm Animal Behaviour and Welfare.. 3rd ed. CAB International; Wallingford, UK: 1997. p. 437.
  168. Prelle I, Phillips CJC, Paranhos Da Costa MJ, Vandenberghe NC, Broom DM. Are cows that consistently enter the same side of a two-sided milking parlour more fearful of novel situations or more competitive?. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2004;87:193–203.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2004.01.014google scholar: lookup
  169. Hopster H, Van Der Werf JTN, Blokhuis HJ. Side preference of dairy cows in the milking parlour and its effects on behaviour and heart rate during milking.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1998;55:213–229.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(97)00064-6google scholar: lookup
  170. Tanner M, Grandin T, Cattell M, Deesing M. The relationship between facial hair whorls and milking parlor side preferences.. J. Anim. Sci. 1994;72:207.
  171. Zucs E, Acs I, Csiba A, Ugry K. A csoportletszam szerepe a fejostehenek tartastechnologiajanak kialakitasaban. 3. Kozlemeny: A fejoallas hasznatala.. Allattenyesztes-es-Takarmanyozas. 1992;41:133–152.
  172. Paranhos Da Costa MJR, Broom DM. Consistency of side choice in the milking parlour by Holstein-Friesian cows and its relationship with their reactivity and milk yield.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2001;70:177–186.
    doi: 10.1016/S0168-1591(00)00158-1pubmed: 11118660google scholar: lookup
  173. Hansen SW, Damgaard BM. Behavioural and adrenocortical coping strategies and the effect on eosinophil leucocyte level and heterophil/lymphocyte-ratio in beech marten (Martes foina). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1993;35:369–388.
    doi: 10.1016/0168-1591(93)90088-7google scholar: lookup
  174. Miguel-Pacheco GG, Thomas HJ, Kaler J, Craigon J, Huxley JN. Effects of lameness treatment for claw horn lesions on lying behaviour in dairy cows.. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2016;179:11–16.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2016.04.001google scholar: lookup
  175. Večeřa M, Falta D, Filipčík R, Chládek G, Lategan F. The effect of low and high cowshed temperatures on the behaviour and milk performance of Czech fleckvieh cows.. Ann. Anim. Sci. 2016;16:1153–1161.
    doi: 10.1515/aoas-2016-0021google scholar: lookup
  176. Rizhova LY, Kokorina EP. Behavioural asymmetry is involved in regulation of autonomic processes: Left side presentation of food improves reproduction and lactation in cows.. Behav. Brain Res. 2005;161:75–81.
    doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2005.01.007pubmed: 15904712google scholar: lookup
  177. Thorbergson ZW, Nielsen SG, Beaulieu RJ, Doyle RE. Physiological and Behaviour al Responses of Horses to Wither Scratching and Patting the Neck When Under Saddle.. J. Appl. Anim. Welf. Sci. 2016;19:245–259.
    doi: 10.1080/10888705.2015.1130630pubmed: 26958705google scholar: lookup
  178. Lees AM, Salvin HE, Colditz I, Lee C. The influence of temperament on body temperature response to handling in angus cattle.. Animals 2020;10:172.
    doi: 10.3390/ani10010172pmc: PMC7023438pubmed: 31968606google scholar: lookup
  179. Stewart M, Webster JR, Schaefer AL, Cook NJ, Scott SL. Infrared thermography as a non-invasive tool to study animal welfare.. Anim. Welf. 2005;14:319–325.
    doi: 10.1017/S096272860002964Xgoogle scholar: lookup
  180. McCafferty DJ, Gallon S, Nord A. Challenges of measuring body temperatures of free-ranging birds and mammals.. Anim. Biotelem. 2015;3:33.
    doi: 10.1186/s40317-015-0075-2google scholar: lookup
  181. Montanholi YR, Odongo NE, Swanson KC, Schenkel FS, McBride BW, Miller SP. Application of infrared thermography as an indicator of heat and methane production and its use in the study of skin temperature in response to physiological events in dairy cattle (Bos taurus). J. Therm. Biol. 2008;33:468–475.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2008.09.001google scholar: lookup
  182. DiGiacomo K, Marett LC, Wales WJ, Hayes BJ, Dunshea FR, Leury BJ. Thermoregulatory differences in lactating dairy cattle classed as efficient or inefficient based on residual feed intake.. Anim. Prod. Sci. 2014;54:1877–1881.
    doi: 10.1071/AN14311google scholar: lookup
  183. Uddin J, McNeill DM, Lisle AT, Phillips CJC. A sampling strategy for the determination of infrared temperature of relevant external body surfaces of dairy cows.. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2020;64:1583–1592.
    doi: 10.1007/s00484-020-01939-4pubmed: 32506160google scholar: lookup
  184. Idris M, Uddin J, Sullivan M, McNeill DM, Phillips CJC. Non-invasive physiological indicators of heat stress in cattle.. Animals 2021;11:71.
    doi: 10.3390/ani11010071pmc: PMC7824675pubmed: 33401687google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.