Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Browse or browsing: Investigating goat preferences for feeding posture, feeding height and feed type
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Browse or browsing: Investigating goat preferences for feeding posture, feeding height and feed type
Do you wish to request the book?
Browse or browsing: Investigating goat preferences for feeding posture, feeding height and feed type
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Browse or browsing: Investigating goat preferences for feeding posture, feeding height and feed type
2022
Overview
Goats naturally browse different forages in various postures; this differs from typical farm practice, thus there are opportunities to improve goat welfare by understanding what and how they like to eat. We investigated if feeding preference was related to posture, feeder height relative to the ground, and type of feed. Sixteen adult, Saanen cross females participated in two experiments comparing a floor-level feeder (grazing posture; farm standard), with an elevated feeder (browsing posture; Exp1) and a platform-level feeder (raised, grazing posture; Exp2), when two forages (leaves, grass) were offered. Measurements included feed intake (g of DM/feeder), feeder switching frequency, first feeder visited, latency to visit first feeder and exploration and non-feeding activity time. Effects of posture (Exp1), height (Exp2) and feed type were analyzed. Type of feed affected preference for feeding posture and height. All goats consumed leaves over grass (Exp1: POP: 188 ± 6.52 g, GRA: 20.3 ± 7.19 g; Exp2: POP: 191 ± 6.15 g, GRA: 0.231 ± 6.91 g; P < 0.001), and the feeder containing leaves was often visited first (Exp 1: GRA/POP: 94% of visits, P < 0.001, POP/GRA: 53%, P = 0.724 ; Exp 2: GRA/POP: 91%, P < 0.001; POP/GRA: 69%, P = 0.041). When goats received only leaves, they consumed more from the floor-level (162 ± 22.2 g) vs. elevated level (102 ± 21.9 g) feeder ( P = 0.039). When goats received only grass, there was no posture or height preference; however, they changed feeders more frequently (at least 4x (Exp1) and 2x (Exp2) more than other combinations; P > 0.01). Feed intake was negatively affected by exploring time (Exp1 only: r = −0.541; P < 0.001) and performing non-feeding activities (Exp1: r = −0.698; P < 0.001; Exp2: r = −0.673; P < 0.001). We did not identify a preference for elevated feeding posture; however, we suggest that our short test (compared to previous work) encouraged goats to make choices based on line-of-sight and also that the elevated feeder design (replicated from previous work) made leaf access harder. Nonetheless, we highlight that some goats actively used the elevated feeder; this coupled with the clear preference for leaves over grass, suggests that offering feed type and presentation diversity would allow individuals to express their natural feeding behavior more fully.
