Taste responses in sheep

This study involved the use of the two-choice preference test, where the choices were tap water and tap water-chemical solutions, to determine the responses of sheep to ascending concentrations of 20 chemicals (taste stimulants). The chemicals tested were: the sugars, sucrose, maltose, lactose, glucose, fructose and galactose; the sodium salts of chloride, acetate (NaAc), propionate (NaPr) and butyrate (NaBu); the acids, hydrochloric, acetic (HAc), propionic (HPr), butyric (HBu) and lactic (HLa); and, quinine hydrochloride (QHC1), urea, sodium saccharin, sodium hydroxide and ethanol. Each sheep was individually penned and fed to appetite. Responses were expressed on the basis of percent intake (that is, the percent that the amount of test fluid consumed was of total fluid intake for a given time period). Three groups of ten sheep. each were used successively, the groups being divided into two units of five animals and these units then being placed on alternate concentrations of a test chemical. The mean responses of the units of five sheep were plotted graphically and analyzed by the linear regression technique when definite rejection trends were apparent. The chemical concentrations at the acceptance and rejection thresholds (that is, where the test chemical comprised 40% and 20% of total fluid intake, respectively) were estimated from the regression line. When rejection trends did not occur the responses were assessed on the basis of their position relative to the non-discrimination zone. The nondiscrimination zone was described as that zone where the test fluid comprised not less than 40% nor more than 60% of total fluid intake. It was derived by determining the normal variation, with tap water in both containers, around a theoretical mean intake of 50% from each container. The responses to the sugars were, generally, of an indifferent nature. One unit of animals displayed a. moderately strong preference (79. 2% of intake) for sucrose at the . 1461 M concentration while another unit was indifferent to the sugar at that concentration. A weak preference (69.0% of intake) occurred for glucose at the . 2775 M concentration. These were the only positive preferences observed for any of the test chemicals. Moderate degrees of rejection were manifested for sucrose concentrations above . 4382.M and for maltose concentrations above. 0028 M. The pattern of the responses to sodium saccharin was similar to that of the sugars: indifference at lower and intermediate concentrations and moderate degrees of rejection at higher concentrations. The acceptance and rejection thresholds for NaC1 were at concentrations of . 0429 M and . 3764 M, respectively. The thresholds for NaAc were similar to those for NaC1. NaPr and NaBu had lower threshold concentrations than NaCl and NaAc-.-possibly because of smell. The threshold concentrations and pH's obtained for HAc were: acceptance, . 0024 M, pH of 4. 2; rejection, . 0276 M, pH of 3. 4. The thresholds for HC1 were at lower concentrations and lower pH's than for HAc. HPr and HBu were discriminated against at lower concentrations and higher pH's than was HAc--possibly due 'to smell. The concentrations at the acceptance and rejection thresholds of NaOH were, respectively, .0036 M ('pH 11. 5) and .0132 M (pH 12. 0). A comparison of these values with those for HC1 indicates that sheep are more tolerant of highly alkaline pH's than of highly acid pH's. QHC1 elicited acceptance and rejection threshold concentrations of. 00048 M and . 0037 M, respectively. The responses to urea were highly variable, but appreciable intake was observed at concentrations of .4163 and 8325 M, The thresholds for ethyl alcohol were at higher concentrations than for any other of the test chemicals, sucrose and glucose being the exceptions. The acceptance threshold for ethanol was at a concentration of. 2621 M and the rejection threshold was at 1. 422 M. With respect to glucose, NaC1, HAc and QHC1, the sensitivity series for the four primary taste groups, in order of increasing sensitivity, was: sweet, salty, sour and bitter. However, after comparing the threshold values derived in this study for the sheep to values reported for the goat and calf, the conclusions can be made that the sheep is relatively indifferent to sweet tasting substances and relatively tolerant to bitter tasting substances. Considerable individual variation existed in the taste responses exhibited by the sheep used in this study

A comparison of taste responses in pygmy goats, normal goats, sheep and cattle

This study involved the use of the two-choice preference test to determine the taste responses of eight, each, of pygmy goats, normal goats, sheep and cattle to ascending concentrations of sucrose (Suc), sodium chloride (NaC1), acetic acid (HAc) and quinine hydrochloride (QHCI). In addition, sheep and cattle were tested at 2. 08 and 8. 33% molasses concentrations. Each animal was individually penned and fed to appetite on a nutritionally adequate diet. Responses were expressed on the basis of percent of total fluid intake comprised by test. solution. Goats were allowed two-day test periods per concentration; sheep and cattle were given one-day test periods. Mean responses and standard deviations of the eight-animal groups were plotted graphically and compared to threshold levels of intake. Response trends were analyzed by stepwise multiple linear regression. A 95% confidence interval was established for a theoretical mean intake of 50%. The upper confidence limit was at 60% intake and the lower was at 40% intake. They were termed, respectively, upper discrimination threshold (UPT) and lower discrimination threshold (LDT). The rejection threshold (RET) was set at 20% intake and the preference threshold (PRT) at 80% intake. Ascending or descending responses at the various threshold concentrations were identified by and , respectively. Molar concentrations of thresholds crossed by responses of pygmies, normals, sheep and cattle, respectively, were for Suc, UDT; .055t and .53k; UDT: .033t, PRT: .38t; LDT: .41; UDT: OZSt and . 4U, PRT: . 058f and .24, LDT: . 56; for NaC1, UDT: .024t and .Z1, PRT; .iot and ,14, LDT: .36L RET: , 60; UDT: . 0Z7, LDT: . 15L RET: . 55; LDT: .21, RET: . 53 ; LDT: , 016, RET: , 14; for MAc, UDT: . 0034t and .04Z, LDT: .l6, RET: > ZZ; LDT: .014, RET: .11; UDT: .0034t, LDT: .028, RET: .094; UDT: .0017t and .0069j, LDT: ,014, RET: .038'; and, for QHCL, UDT: > .000016t and .000047,, LDT: .00030, RET: .00202; UDT: .000016t and .000063, LDT: .00035, RET: .0020Z; LDT: ,000094, RET: .00035k; LDT: .00013 , RET: .000381. In general, stimulating effectiveness was greatest for bitter, followed in order by sour, salty and sweet. Cattle were usually first to make a discrimination, goats were generally second and sheep were normally last. The major exception was for the bitter taste group where the order was goats, sheep, cattle. As a rule, goats were more tolerant of high concentrations than were sheep and sheep were more tolerant than cattle. The exception was, again, the bitter taste group where the order was goats, cattle, sheep. Sheep were indifferent to 2. 08 and 8. 33% molasses concentrations. Cattle demonstrated stroxg preference respoises to the 2. 08% level and weak preference reactions to the 8.33% level

Heart Rate Responses during Simulated Fire Ground Scenarios among Full-Time Firefighters

International Journal of Exercise Science 13(2): 374-382, 2020. Simulated fire ground scenarios (SFGS) provide firefighters with an opportunity to maintain skills, receive feedback, and optimize performance. Although there is extensive research on heart rate (HR) changes in the firefighter population, few examine the differences between positions. Firefighters are primarily responsible for fire suppression and control (23), officers for emergency operations and organizational management, paramedics for providing on-scene emergency medical care, and drivers are responsible for driving the fire apparatus. Utilizing HR analysis to quantify the physical demands of SFGS among firefighting crews by position. Sixty-seven male (age: 38.97 ± 9.17; ht: 177.99 ± 6.45 cm. wt: 88.83 ± 13.55 kg) firefighters (FF) participated in this investigation. FF crews performed two SFGS involving the suppression and control of a structural fire. Participants were outfitted with heart rate (HR) monitors and average heart rate (HRavg) and maximum heart rate (HRmax) data were collected for each of the two SFGS. Significant differences were observed for Age (P = 0.01), APMHR (P = 0.01), HRmax1(P = 0.04), and HRmax2(P = 0.04) in which firefighters had higher values for Age-predicted maximal heart rate (APMHR), HRmax1, HRmax2compared to the officers. SFGS can be very physically demanding events that may elicit maximal or near maximal HR responses regardless of position. Based on the metabolic demands of these events and the individual firefighter’s capabilities, this information can be used to develop resistance training and conditioning programs that optimize performance at maximal or near maximal heart rates

Progress in dark tourism and thanatourism research: An uneasy relationship with heritage tourism

This paper reviews academic research into dark tourism and thanatourism over the 1996–2016 period. The aims of this paper are threefold. First, it reviews the evolution of the concepts of dark tourism and thanatourism, highlighting similarities and differences between them. Second it evaluates progress in 6 key themes and debates. These are: issues of the definition and scope of the concepts; ethical issues associated with such forms of tourism; the political and ideological dimensions of dark tourism and thanatourism; the nature of demand for places of death and suffering; the management of such places; and the methods of research used for investigating such tourism. Third, research gaps and issues that demand fuller scrutiny are identified. The paper argues that two decades of research have not convincingly demonstrated that dark tourism and thanatourism are distinct forms of tourism, and in many ways they appear to be little different from heritage tourism

The philosophical foundations of participatory democracy: natural, human, critical

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo