Many studies showed that a positive human–animal relationship may develop in farm animals like pigs, cattle, sheep, horses or poultry (Waiblinger, 2009 and Hemsworth and Coleman, 2011). A positive relationship is notably characterised by an absence of fear reactions to humans and an easiness to handle the animals (Waiblinger et al., 2006). It is favourable to animal welfare and also enhances performances (Boivin et al., 2003 and Hemsworth, 2008) and may be a source of positive emotions for farm animals (e.g. Tallet et al., 2005 and Schmied et al., 2008). Among the interactions with humans that can be perceived as positive, food provision is an efficient way of attracting animals (i.e. Hemsworth et al., 1996b, Jago et al., 1999 and Sankey et al., 2010). Gentle tactile interactions have also been tested as a potential ![ARRY-614]()
way to decrease fear of humans and to increase attraction to them. In farm animals, this ARRY-614 has mainly been investigated in cattle, sheep and horses. Although some studies do not show a beneficial effect of gentle tactile stimulations on perception of humans (Boivin et al., 1998, Jago et al., 1999 and Hausberger et al., 2008) most of them indicate that such stimulations are a source of positive reactions towards humans and induce a decrease of behavioural reactions of fear in human presence (e.g. Becker and Lobato, 1997, Tallet et al., 2005, Tallet et al., 2011a, Tallet et al., 2011b and Probst et al., 2012). Very few data are still available in farm animals regarding the consequences of gentle tactile stimulations on physiological indicators of stress like cortisol level and heart rate. In beef cattle, gentle touching in early age seems to dampen the cortisol release at slaughter (Probst et al., 2012) while the reduction is not always significant when applied only few weeks before slaughtering (Mattiello et al., 2010). Likewise, gentle stroking has been shown reduce heart rate increase during a veterinary procedure (Schmied et al., 2010) or in presence of the handler in an arena test (Raussi et al., 2003; Tallet et al., 2006) in cattle and sheep. To our knowledge, the influence of gentle contact on the physiological indicators of stress has been poorly investigated in pigs. The cortisol release of pigs after human exposure was analysed only in two studies (Hemsworth et al., 1986a and Paterson and Pearce, 1992) and both of them did not show clear effects but the numbers of pigs studied were very low (four or seven pigs in each group).
way to decrease fear of humans and to increase attraction to them. In farm animals, this ARRY-614 has mainly been investigated in cattle, sheep and horses. Although some studies do not show a beneficial effect of gentle tactile stimulations on perception of humans (Boivin et al., 1998, Jago et al., 1999 and Hausberger et al., 2008) most of them indicate that such stimulations are a source of positive reactions towards humans and induce a decrease of behavioural reactions of fear in human presence (e.g. Becker and Lobato, 1997, Tallet et al., 2005, Tallet et al., 2011a, Tallet et al., 2011b and Probst et al., 2012). Very few data are still available in farm animals regarding the consequences of gentle tactile stimulations on physiological indicators of stress like cortisol level and heart rate. In beef cattle, gentle touching in early age seems to dampen the cortisol release at slaughter (Probst et al., 2012) while the reduction is not always significant when applied only few weeks before slaughtering (Mattiello et al., 2010). Likewise, gentle stroking has been shown reduce heart rate increase during a veterinary procedure (Schmied et al., 2010) or in presence of the handler in an arena test (Raussi et al., 2003; Tallet et al., 2006) in cattle and sheep. To our knowledge, the influence of gentle contact on the physiological indicators of stress has been poorly investigated in pigs. The cortisol release of pigs after human exposure was analysed only in two studies (Hemsworth et al., 1986a and Paterson and Pearce, 1992) and both of them did not show clear effects but the numbers of pigs studied were very low (four or seven pigs in each group).