A panting score index for sheep

  • A. M. LeesEmail author
  • M. L. Sullivan
  • J. C. W. Olm
  • A. J. Cawdell-Smith
  • J. B. Gaughan
Original Paper


When exposed to hot conditions, heat dissipation via an increase in respiration rate (RR) is an important thermoregulatory mechanism for sheep. However, evaluating RR under field conditions is difficult. In cattle, a viable alternative has been to assess panting score (PS); therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the relationship between RR and PS to determine if a PS index can be used to evaluate heat load in sheep. One hundred and forty-four Merino wethers (44.02 ± 0.32 kg) were used within a climate-controlled study. The study was replicated twice over 29 days, where each replicate consisted of two treatments: (1) thermoneutral (TN) and (2) hot (HOT). Ambient temperature (TA) and relative humidity (RH) were maintained between 18 and 20 °C and 60 and 70% respectively for the TN treatment. For the HOT treatment, heat load increased steadily over the 29 days. Minimum TA was 22.5 °C and maximum was 38.5 °C, while RH decreased (60 to 30%) as TA increased in the HOT treatment. A comprehensive PS classification was developed by enhancing the current sheep PS index and aligning the descriptors with the current PS index utilized in beef cattle studies. Respiration rate and PS were obtained for each animal at 3-h intervals between 0800 h and 1700 h daily. These data were used to determine the mean RR for each PS, across the study and within the TN and HOT treatments. The relationship between PS and RR was evaluated using a Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Data were also analyzed using a general linear model to determine the impact of PS, posture and animal identification (animal ID) on RR within each PS. Unsurprisingly, RR increased as PS increased, and PS, 0 and RR, 2.5 were 30.7 ± 0.59 and 246.8 ± 12.20 bpm respectively. There was a strong relationship between RR and PS (r = 0.71; P < 0.0001). As RR increased, sheep were more likely to be observed standing (P < 0.001). Mean PS of sheep within the HOT treatment (1.49 ± 0.02) were greater (P = 0.0085) when compared to the TN (1.17 ± 0.02) sheep. Individual animal ID accounted for approximately 7–37% of the variation observed for RR across PS, indicating that animal ID and climatic conditions were influencing RR and PS. These results suggest that the comprehensive PS index described here can be used as a visual appraisal of the heat load status of sheep.


Heat stress Sheep Thermal comfort Panting score Respiratory dynamics Respiration rate 



The authors would like to thank Allan Lisle for his assistance with statistical analysis. The authors also wish to acknowledge Jarrod C. Lees for his valuable comments and suggestions on improving this manuscript. The authors also wish to acknowledge and offer thanks Meat and Livestock Australia Pty Ltd. for providing the plates used within Fig. 1.


Funding for this study was provided by Meat and Livestock Australia Pty Ltd., North Sydney, NSW, Australia, LiveCorp, North Sydney, NSW, Australia and the Australian Federal Government, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Compliance and ethical standards

This study was conducted with the approval of The University of Queensland (UQ) animal ethics committee (SAFS/178/13/MLA).


  1. Basiricò L, Morera P, Primi V, Lacetera N, Nardone A, Bernabucci U (2011) Cellular thermotolerance is associated with heat shock protein 70.1 genetic polymorphisms in Holstein lactating cows. Cell Stress Chaperones 16(4):441–448. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bianca W (1962) Tolerance to severe heat and the behaviour of respiratory minute volume in cattle. Nature 195:1208–1209. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blaxter KL, Graham NM, Wainman FW, Armstrong DG (1959) Environmental temperature, energy metabolism and heat regulation in sheep. II. The partition of heat losses in closely clipped sheep. J Agric Sci 52(1):25–40. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bligh J (1985) Temperature regulation. In: Yousef MK (ed) Stress physiology in livestock, vol I. CRC Press Inc., Baco Raton, Florida, pp 75–96Google Scholar
  5. Brown-Brandl TM, Eigenberg RA, Nienaber JA (2006a) Heat stress risk factors of feedlot heifers. Livest Sci 105(1–3):57–68. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brown-Brandl TM, Nienaber JA, Eigenberg RA, Mader TL, Morrow JL, Dailey JW (2006b) Comparison of heat tolerance of feedlot heifers of different breeds. Livest Sci 105(1–3):19–26. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Department of Agriculture Fisheries and Forestry. 2011. Australian standards for the export of livestock (version 2.3) 2011 and the Australian Positoin Statement of the Export of Livestock, Australian Government: Accessed 18 May 2016
  8. Gaughan JB, Bonner S, Loxton I, Mader TL, Lisle A, Lawrence R (2010a) Effect of shade on body temperature and performance of feedlot steers. J Anim Sci 88(12):4056–4067. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gaughan JB, Holt SM, Hahn GL, Mader TL, Eigenberg RA (2000) Respiration rate - is it a good measure of heat stress in cattle. Asian-Australas J Anim Sci 13:329–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gaughan JB, Mader TL (2014) Body temperature and respiratory dynamics in un-shaded beef cattle. Int J Biometeorol 58:1443–1450. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gaughan JB, Mader TL, Holt SM, Lisle A (2008) A new heat load index for feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci 86(1):226–234. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gaughan JB, Mader TL, Holt SM, Sullivan ML, Hahn GL (2010b) Assessing the heat tolerance of 17 beef cattle genotypes. Int J Biometeorol 54(6):617–627. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hales JRS (1969) Changes in respiratory activity and body temperature of the severely heat-stressed ox and sheep. Comp Biochem Physiol 31(6):975–985. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hales JRS, Brown GD (1974) Net energetic and thermoregulatory efficiency during panting in the sheep. Comp Biochem Physiol A Physiol 49(3):413–422. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hales JRS, Findlay JD (1968) Respiration of the ox: normal values and the effects of exposure to hot environments. Respir Physiol 4(3):333–352. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hales JRS, Webster MED (1967) Respiratory function during thermal tachypnoea in sheep. J Physiol 190(2):241–260. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lees, A. M. 2016. Biological responses of feedlot cattle to heat load (PhD Thesis). The University of Queensland, School of Agriculture and Food SciencesGoogle Scholar
  18. Mader TL, Davis MS, Brown-Brandl TM (2006) Environmental factors influencing heat stress in feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci 84:712–719. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Marai IFM, El-Darawany AA, Fadiel A, Abdel-Hafez MAM (2007) Physiological traits as affected by heat stress in sheep - a review. Small Rumin Res 71(1–3):1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. McCarthy M 2005. Pilot monitoring of shipboard environmental conditions and animal performance. MLA Final Report LIVE.223. Meat and Livestock Australia, North Sydney, NSW, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  21. Mitlöhner FM, Morrow-Tesch JL, Wilson SC, Dailey JW, McGlone JJ (2001) Behavioral sampling techniques for feedlot cattle. J Anim Sci 79(5):1189–1193. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Silanikove N (2000) Effects of heat stress on the welfare of extensively managed domestic ruminants. Livest Prod Sci 67(1–2):1–18. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stockman CA (2006) The physiological and behavioural responses of sheep exposed to heat load within intensive sheep industries. Murdoch University, Perth, WA. AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  24. Stockman CA, Barnes AL, Maloney SK, Taylor E, McCarthy M, Pethick D (2011) Effect of prolonged exposure to continuous heat and humidity similar to long haul live export voyages in Merino wethers. Anim Prod Sci 51(2):135–143. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Young BA, Hall AB (1993) Heat load in cattle in the Australian environment. In: Coombes R (ed) Australian Beef. Morescope Publishing, Melbourne, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  26. Young BA, Hall AB, Goodwin PJ, Gaughan JB (1997) Identifying excessive heat load. In: Bottcher RW, Hoff SJ (eds) Livestock environment V, proceedings of the fifth international symposium. American Society of Agricultural Engineers St. Joseph, MI, USA, pp 572–576Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ISB 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Agriculture and Food Sciences, Animal Science GroupThe University of QueenslandGattonAustralia
  2. 2.School of Veterinary Sciences, Animal Science GroupThe University of QueenslandGattonAustralia

Personalised recommendations