Main content

Who’s afraid of the big bad glove? Testing for fear and its correlates in mink.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Mason, G.J.
dc.contributor.author Meagher, R.K.
dc.contributor.author Bechard, A.
dc.contributor.author Duncan, I.J.H.
dc.date.accessioned 2012-12-21T01:11:48Z
dc.date.available 2012-12-21T01:11:48Z
dc.date.issued 2011
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/10214/4966
dc.description.abstract Fear in farm animals is a welfare and economic concern. For Scandinavian mink, the “stick test” is common for assessing fearfulness: a spatula is inserted into the cage and minks’ immediate responses are noted. However, on Ontario farms, fearfulness in the stick test was very rare and aggressive responses were prevalent, rendering this test poor for testing hypotheses related to fear and welfare. We therefore developed a modified version, the “glove test”, where the finger of a handling glove is inserted into the cage. This proved more sensitive than the stick test for detecting fearfulness in Ontario mink (20% vs. 2.5%, P < 0.0001); and successfully reduced aggressive responding (22% vs. 41%, P < 0.0001). When test-retest reliability was assessed conventionally, it was only moderate (e.g., 37.5% mink behaved the same in three tests). However, it is biologically realistic to expect habituation over repeated trials (e.g., reduced fearfulness), and treating such changes as acceptable, results were reliable for 76% of mink over three tests. Reliability could be further improved by taking location into account, since some mink were unresponsive only if in the nest box, half-asleep (Experiment 3: kappa of 0.38 if never in nest box vs. kappa of 0.002 if were). Glove tests had construct validity: mink immediately classified as “fearful” spent more time exhibiting other fear-related behaviours (“ambivalence”: mean 30 s vs. 4 s, P = 0.009), while mink immediately classified as “curious” then spent more time investigating the glove (mean 103 s vs. 57 s, P < 0.0001). Glove tests also revealed expected temperament differences between Black and Pastel colour-types, with Pastels being less fearful (P = 0.001). Finally, we tested whether fearfulness in the glove test is associated with decreased reproductive success. Pastel mink that were fearful during the presumed gestation period were less likely to reproduce (P = 0.006). Like stick tests, glove tests are thus practical, valid and reliable for assessing fearfulness in farmed mink, but they are better for detecting fearfulness in low fear populations. en_US
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher Applied Animal Behaviour Science en_US
dc.subject fear en_US
dc.subject temperament en_US
dc.subject mink en_US
dc.subject welfare en_US
dc.subject reproductive success en_US
dc.subject reliability en_US
dc.subject validity en_US
dc.title Who’s afraid of the big bad glove? Testing for fear and its correlates in mink. en_US
dc.type Article en_US
dc.contributor.affiliation Department of Animal and Poultry Science
dc.rights.license All items in the Atrium are protected by copyright with all rights reserved unless otherwise indicated.
dcterms.relation R. K. Meagher, A. Bechard, I. J. H. Duncan & G. Mason (2011). Who’s afraid of the big bad glove? Testing for fear and its correlates in mink. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 133, 254-264.


Files in this item

Files Size Format View Description
Meagher_et_al._2011.pdf 536.8Kb PDF View/Open Who’s afraid of the big bad glove? Testing for fear and its correlates in mink.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record