J. Anim Sci.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kronberg, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Ayers, E. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kronberg, S. L.
Right arrow Articles by Ayers, E. L.

Journal of Animal Science, Vol 71, Issue 7 1767-1770, Copyright © 1993 by American Society of Animal Science


JOURNAL ARTICLE

Feed aversion learning in cattle with delayed negative consequences

S. L. Kronberg, R. B. Muntifering and E. L. Ayers
Department of Animal and Range Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman 59717.

Two experiments were conducted to study the ingestive behavior of cattle when given a delayed dose of the aversive agent lithium chloride (LiCl) after eating a novel feed. In the first experiment, 20 calves were randomly divided into four groups (n = 5). The control group (G1) received 80 mg/kg BW of sodium chloride (NaCl) 4 h after eating a novel feed. Groups 2 (G2), 3 (G3), and 4 (G4) received 80 mg/kg of LiCl at 4, 8, and 12 h, respectively, after eating the novel feed. When calves were offered the novel feed on subsequent days, G2 and G3 ate less (P < .05) than G1. There was no difference (P > .05) in intakes between G1 and G4. In the second experiment, 15 calves were randomly divided into three groups (n = 5). The control group (G1) received 80 mg/kg BW of NaCl 12 h after eating a novel feed, whereas G2 and G3 received 80 and 160 mg/kg BW, respectively, of LiCl 12 h after eating the novel feed. When calves were offered the novel feed on subsequent days, G1 and G2 ate similar (P > .05) amounts, whereas G3 ate much less (P < .05) of it than the other groups. Cattle learned to avoid novel feeds even when they experienced negative postingestive consequences up to 12 h after they ate the feeds. The capacity for long-delay learning seems to be related to the severity of negative consequences experienced.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the American Society of Animal Science.