Do ewe remember? Comparative foraging behaviour of sheep and alternative livestock species in a spatial memory task

IF 2.2 2区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE Applied Animal Behaviour Science Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106580
Megan R. Quail, Mariecia D. Fraser
{"title":"Do ewe remember? Comparative foraging behaviour of sheep and alternative livestock species in a spatial memory task","authors":"Megan R. Quail,&nbsp;Mariecia D. Fraser","doi":"10.1016/j.applanim.2025.106580","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Foraging strategy is fundamentally linked with resource availability and dietary preference. Adaptive feeding behaviours, such as the role of spatial memory when navigating to food sites, are found in wild foraging species. We hypothesised that domesticated livestock species also possess adaptive foraging, with potential interspecies differences in this ability resulting from variations in foraging strategy. As such, this study aimed to compare foraging behaviour, in relation to ability to remember and prioritize food sites of different value, in livestock species that have different dietary preferences and backgrounds: sheep (<em>Ovis aries</em>), goats (<em>Capra hircus</em>) and alpacas (<em>Vicugna pacos</em>). A total of 705 trials were conducted across general training, criterion training and test trials. Eighteen sheep, 10 goats and 7 alpacas were presented with eight identical buckets, positioned on four cross mounts, that were placed into four corners of the test arena. Following acclimation and training, the subjects were required to search the arena for two randomly baited buckets, each of the two buckets containing either the large food reward or small food reward. After locating the reward, the animals re-entered the arena and were tasked to relocate the same buckets (Experiment 1). Each subject was allowed a maximum of two incorrect visits to non-baited buckets per trial, and the trial continued until both baits had been eaten or 7 min of inactivity had passed (more than two errors resulted in a ‘failure’ score for the individual trial). These conditions were then replicated, except that the animal was allowed to make a single selection between the large or small reward following their return to the arena after the initial search (Experiment 2). The goats passed the most trials across all three species (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.001) and made fewer errors when relocating the baited buckets in training and test trials across both experiments (<em>p</em> &lt; 0.05 and <em>p</em> &lt; 0.01, respectively). In contrast, the alpacas failed to pass the training criterion, with the exception of one individual, primarily due to exceeding the time limit for inactivity. We detected no significant difference in preference for the larger food quantity between species in either experiment (<em>p</em> = 0.65 and <em>p</em> = 0.55, respectively). Equally, selection of either quantity did not deviate from random chance across all individuals (except for a single sheep, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.05, Experiment 2). Thus, goats exhibited the greatest spatial memory of the three species across both test conditions, which may reflect the adaptive foraging strategy that is required to navigate patchy distributions of browse in the complex natural habitats of this species. We recommend that further work should be carried out to determine the scale of selectivity and role of habitat perception on grazing distribution in these species. This information could be used to predict how differences in foraging strategy can be exploited to maximise pasture use efficiency in multi-species grazing systems.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8222,"journal":{"name":"Applied Animal Behaviour Science","volume":"285 ","pages":"Article 106580"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Animal Behaviour Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168159125000784","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Foraging strategy is fundamentally linked with resource availability and dietary preference. Adaptive feeding behaviours, such as the role of spatial memory when navigating to food sites, are found in wild foraging species. We hypothesised that domesticated livestock species also possess adaptive foraging, with potential interspecies differences in this ability resulting from variations in foraging strategy. As such, this study aimed to compare foraging behaviour, in relation to ability to remember and prioritize food sites of different value, in livestock species that have different dietary preferences and backgrounds: sheep (Ovis aries), goats (Capra hircus) and alpacas (Vicugna pacos). A total of 705 trials were conducted across general training, criterion training and test trials. Eighteen sheep, 10 goats and 7 alpacas were presented with eight identical buckets, positioned on four cross mounts, that were placed into four corners of the test arena. Following acclimation and training, the subjects were required to search the arena for two randomly baited buckets, each of the two buckets containing either the large food reward or small food reward. After locating the reward, the animals re-entered the arena and were tasked to relocate the same buckets (Experiment 1). Each subject was allowed a maximum of two incorrect visits to non-baited buckets per trial, and the trial continued until both baits had been eaten or 7 min of inactivity had passed (more than two errors resulted in a ‘failure’ score for the individual trial). These conditions were then replicated, except that the animal was allowed to make a single selection between the large or small reward following their return to the arena after the initial search (Experiment 2). The goats passed the most trials across all three species (p < 0.001) and made fewer errors when relocating the baited buckets in training and test trials across both experiments (p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). In contrast, the alpacas failed to pass the training criterion, with the exception of one individual, primarily due to exceeding the time limit for inactivity. We detected no significant difference in preference for the larger food quantity between species in either experiment (p = 0.65 and p = 0.55, respectively). Equally, selection of either quantity did not deviate from random chance across all individuals (except for a single sheep, p < 0.05, Experiment 2). Thus, goats exhibited the greatest spatial memory of the three species across both test conditions, which may reflect the adaptive foraging strategy that is required to navigate patchy distributions of browse in the complex natural habitats of this species. We recommend that further work should be carried out to determine the scale of selectivity and role of habitat perception on grazing distribution in these species. This information could be used to predict how differences in foraging strategy can be exploited to maximise pasture use efficiency in multi-species grazing systems.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Animal Behaviour Science
Applied Animal Behaviour Science 农林科学-行为科学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
21.70%
发文量
191
审稿时长
18.1 weeks
期刊介绍: This journal publishes relevant information on the behaviour of domesticated and utilized animals. Topics covered include: -Behaviour of farm, zoo and laboratory animals in relation to animal management and welfare -Behaviour of companion animals in relation to behavioural problems, for example, in relation to the training of dogs for different purposes, in relation to behavioural problems -Studies of the behaviour of wild animals when these studies are relevant from an applied perspective, for example in relation to wildlife management, pest management or nature conservation -Methodological studies within relevant fields The principal subjects are farm, companion and laboratory animals, including, of course, poultry. The journal also deals with the following animal subjects: -Those involved in any farming system, e.g. deer, rabbits and fur-bearing animals -Those in ANY form of confinement, e.g. zoos, safari parks and other forms of display -Feral animals, and any animal species which impinge on farming operations, e.g. as causes of loss or damage -Species used for hunting, recreation etc. may also be considered as acceptable subjects in some instances -Laboratory animals, if the material relates to their behavioural requirements
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board The current status of your manuscript in the online submission system Do ewe remember? Comparative foraging behaviour of sheep and alternative livestock species in a spatial memory task To see or not to see: Horses’ ability to find the hidden treat Establishing a predictable cue for catches to reduce reactivity to management events for captive rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1