The impact of gentle contacts on ease of handling, welfare, and growth of calves and on quality of veal meat

• Published in: Journal of animal science 2000-05, Vol.78 (5), p.1219-1226
• Main Authors: Lensink, B. J, Fernandez, X, Boivin, X, Pradel, P, Le Neindre, P, Veissier, I
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Agricultural sciences; Animal behavior; Animal Husbandry - methods; Animal production studies; Animal productions; Animals; Biological and medical sciences; Cattle; Cattle - growth & development; Cattle Diseases - physiopathology; Cattle industry; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Glycogen - analysis; Handling (Psychology); Hydrogen-Ion Concentration; Life Sciences; Male; Meat - standards; Physical growth; Social Behavior; Stress, Physiological - physiopathology; Stress, Physiological - veterinary; Terrestrial animal productions; Vertebrates
• ISSN: 0021-8812; 1525-3163; 0021-8812
• DOI: 10.2527/2000.7851219x

It has been demonstrated previously that regularly stroking and letting calves suck fingers leads to less avoidance and more approach behavior of the calves toward people. To examine whether these positive contacts affect the welfare and productivity of calves and the quality of veal meat we used 22 veal calves housed in individual crates. Half of them received minimal contact with the stockperson (controls), and the other half were given additional gentle contacts around meals, by stroking the calves and allowing them to suck the stockperson's fingers, during the entire fattening period (21 wk). Welfare was assessed through behavioral reactivity (reactions to handling, to surprise stimuli, and to novelty), neuroendocrine responses to stress (cortisol in response to an ACTH challenge, catecholamine-synthesizing enzymes), and health (number of medical treatments, abomasal lesions). Calf productivity was assessed through growth rates and meat quality through glycolytic potential (an estimator of resting glycogen level in muscle), pH, and color. Calves that received gentle contacts were less agitated (P < .01) and tended to defecate less (P = .08) when handled in a cart on wheels than the control calves, but no treatment effects were found in reactivity to novelty and surprise stimuli, responses to ACTH, and catecholamine synthetic potential. Calves given gentle contacts had fewer abomasal lesions than controls (0/11 vs 4/11, P = .05). The glycolytic potential of the semimembranosus muscle was higher in calves that received gentle contacts than in controls (172.6 vs 154.1 micromol/g, P < .05), but no treatment effects were observed on meat pH, meat color, or growth rates. It is concluded that gentling veal calves reduces their reactions to handling. Gentle contacts reduce the reaction to transport shown by differences in glycolytic potential. In addition, the reduction in reactions to handling and the decreased incidence of abomasal lesions can contribute to an improvement of the calves' welfare.