Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2026
In Vivo Evaluation of the Mechanical and Viscoelastic Properties of the Rat Tongue
Published on: July 6, 2017
Evaluation of Holstein cows with different tongue-rolling frequencies: stress immunity, rumen environment and general
Fuyu Sun1,2, Xiaoyang Chen1, Yongfeng Li3
1State Key Laboratory of Animal Nutrition, Institute of Animal Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Haidian District, No.2 Yuanmingyuan West Road, Beijing, China.
Background:
The tongue-rolling behaviour of cows is regarded as an outward sign of stressed animals in a low welfare status. The primary aim of this observational study was to evaluate the association between the frequency of tongue-rolling behaviour and its physiological function. The secondary aim was to explore the relationship between general activities and the frequency of tongue-rolling behaviour of cows. A total of 126 scan sampling behavioural observations were collected over 7 d on 348 Holstein cows with the same lactation stage in the same barn. The tongue-rolling frequency was defined as the number of tongue-rolling observations as a percentage to the total observations per individual cow. According to their tongue-rolling frequency, the cows were grouped into the CON (no tongue-rolling), LT (frequency 1%), MT (frequency 5%), and HT (frequency 10%) groups. Six cows from each group were randomly selected for sampling. Serum samples, rumen fluid, milk yield, and background information were collected. The general behaviour data during 72 continuous hours of dairy cows, including eating time, rumination time, food time (eating time + rumination time), and lying time, were recorded by the collar sensor.
Results:
Cortisol (P = 0.012), γ-hydroxybutyric acid (P = 0.008), epinephrine (P = 0.030), and dopamine (P = 0.047) levels were significantly higher in tongue-rolling groups than in the CON group. Cortisol levels and tongue-rolling frequency had a moderate positive correlation (linearly r = 0.363). With the increase in tongue-rolling frequency, the rumen pH decreased first and then increased (P = 0.013), comparing to the CON group. HT cows had significantly less food time than CON cows (P = 0.035). The frequency of tongue-rolling had a moderate negative relationship with rumination time (r = -0.384) and food time (r = -0.492).
Conclusions:
The tongue-rolling behaviour is considered as a passive coping mechanism, as the stress response in cows with high tongue-rolling frequency increased. Food intake and rumination activities were all closely related to the occurrence of tongue-rolling behaviour.
