Abstract

We investigated effects of early and later life housing on attention bias, as an indicator of affective state, in pigs differing in coping style [reactive (LR) vs. proactive (HR)]. Pigs (n = 128) in barren or enriched housing from birth (B1 vs. E1) that experienced either a switch in housing at 7 weeks of age or not (creating B1B2, B1E2, E1E2, and E1B2 treatments), were studied in a 180-s attention bias test at 11 weeks. Pigs exposed to a 10-s-auditory-and-sudden-motion threat in the test arena paid more attention to the location of the threat, were more vigilant, showed less eating, more walking and were more likely to utter high-pitched vocalisations than non-threat pigs. During threat presence, HR pigs from post-switch enriched housing (E2-HR, i.e., B1E2 + E1E2) showed more vigilance but less exploration than others. After threat removal, no effects were found on time spent paying attention to the threat, vigilance, and eating, but E2-HR pigs paid attention to the threat more frequently, were more likely to utter high-pitched vocalisations and walked more compared to (part of) other groups, suggesting the most negative affective state in these animals. E2 pigs grunted more than B2 pigs. Thus, current housing, but not early life housing, affected behaviour in a personality-dependent manner in this attention bias test. Housing effects were opposite to expectation, possibly due to the short-term effect of the relative contrast between the home pens of the pigs and the test room. This potentially overruled putative long-term effects of environmental conditions on attention bias.

Highlights

  • Affective states can influence cognitive processes, such as attention, memory, decision-making, and judgement

  • It has been shown in the previous studies that animals with a more negative affective state were more vigilant, less willing to eat, and paid more attention to the location of a threat (Brilot and Bateson 2012; Lee et al 2016, 2018), which is parallel with what we found in this study, and confirms that the threat, a combination of a flash light and a moving guillotine door producing squeaking sounds, was aversive for pigs

  • B2 and E2 refer to all pigs in barren housing or enriched housing from 7 weeks of age, respectively, irrespective of their previous housing. a–d, g The percentage of time spent on attention towards the threat, vigilance, eating, exploration, and walking, respectively; e, h the rate of grunts and defecation per min, and f shows the percentage of pigs making high-pitched vocalisations

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Affective states can influence cognitive processes, such as attention, memory, decision-making, and judgement. The form of cognitive bias most widely studied in non-human animals is judgement bias, in which the affective state of the animal influences its interpretation of ambiguous situations. Negative affective states, such as anxiety, can result in an attention bias towards a potential threat (Lee et al 2018). In humans, affect-driven attention bias has been demonstrated, as individuals in high states of anxiety show greater attention towards threatening stimuli than non-anxious individuals (Bradley et al 1995, 1997).

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call