PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

T Grandin

Publications and source records attributed to T Grandin.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

Defense behavior and coping in an autistic savant: the story of Temple Grandin, PhD.

The causal factors in the behaviorally defined syndrome of autism remain unclear, although the past decade has brought to bear two significant developments that shape our view of the disorder. The first of these developments is a growing body of biomedical research that indicates there are multiple etiologies associated with the disorder. This research has allowed for the formation of subgroups based upon neuroanatomical, neurobiological, and neurophysiological abnormalities (Damasio 1984; Piggot 1979; Ritvo et al. 1990). The second is neuropsychological research indicating that the socioemotional deficits are primary to the disorder and may underlie much of the behavioral symptomatology (Fein et al. 1986). These areas of concern undoubtedly have enhanced our understanding of the disorder, yet in their achievements they may too easily absorb what we know about autistics who experience a chronic state of physiological hyperarousal, evidence of which has been found in neurophysiological studies (Delius 1967; Hutt et al. 1965), neurochemical studies (Lake et al. 1977), psychopharmacologic studies (Ratey et al. 1987a), and behavioral studies (Kinsbourne 1980; Kootz et al. 1982; Tinbergen and Tinbergen 1972; Zentall and Zentall 1983). These individuals, perhaps constituting a subgroup of their own, experience an inner state of disorganization that markedly impairs their functioning (Sands and Ratey 1986).

Adaptation, Psychological↗
PubMed1989

Effect of naltrexone on relaxation induced by flank pressure in pigs.

Twenty, 6 to 9 kg Yorkshire piglets were used in 2 trials. Ten piglets received an IM injection of naltrexone at a dose of 1 to 1.3 mg/kg. Ten control pigs received saline. Blind behavioral testing in a "squeeze chute" was conducted 40 minutes after injection. The "squeeze chute" consists of two padded plywood panels hinged on a base to form a V. Each pig was squeezed for 60 seconds. After release, each pig remained in the padded V for 10 minutes. There was sufficient room for the pigs to walk a few steps. Both naltrexone- and saline-treated pigs eventually crouched down in the chute and relaxed against the padded sides of the V. Naltrexone-pretreated pigs had a longer latency to achieve relaxation--311.8 +/- 47.8 seconds vs. 161.8 +/- 30.38 seconds (SE) (p less than 0.02). Each stage of relaxation at induction was rated on a 1-4 scale (1 = squealing and jumping, 4 = relaxed quietly). Naltrexone-treated pigs had significantly lower relaxation ratings than saline-treated pigs (1.90 vs. 3.20) (p less than 0.01). Treatment had no effect on the final degree of relaxation. Naltrexone partially blocked the relaxation response.

Animals↗
PubMed1988

Perfusion method for preparing pig brain cortex for Golgi-Cox impregnation.

The perfusion procedure described in this paper produces high quality impregnation of pig visual and somatosensory cortical neurons with a Golgi-Cox solution. Starting within 30 min after death, pig heads were perfused with a fixative solution composed of a mixture (v/v) of liquid phenol, 5%; formalin, 14%; ethylene glycol, 25%; methanol, 28%; and water, 28% for two periods of 4 hr each. After perfusion, the heads were chilled for at least 18 hr. The entire brain was removed from the skull and then placed in 10% buffered formalin, where it remained for at least 10 days before taking the blocks that were to be immersed in the Golgi-Cox solution. Three weeks spent in the Golgi-Cox solution typically produced uniform neuron impregnation. The tissue blocks were then embedded in celloidin and sectioned at 120 micron. This procedure avoids the following difficulties: Golgi-Cox methods that produced excellent results with rodent or primate tissue were unsuccessful with pig tissue, placing fresh tissue in Golgi-Cox solution resulted in incomplete neuron impregnation, and immersion fixation in 10% buffered formalin without perfusion resulted in excessive staining of glia.

Animals↗
PubMed1987

Animal handling.

Handlers with an understanding of animal behavior can handle livestock more efficiently and safely than handlers that lack an appreciation for the behavior of animals and their welfare. For example, four good handlers in a well-designed circular cattle-handling facility with a hydraulic squeeze could place an ear implant every 15 seconds or brand, vaccinate (up to four injections), place an ear implant, and castrate one animal every 45 seconds. Handlers that yelled at and prodded cattle excessively usually required more time to process each animal, due to wasted time when excited cattle escaped or became jammed in the squeeze. Veterinarians should teach clients the principles of animal behavior that relate to animal handling. Quiet, efficient handling will reduce stress and injuries to both people and livestock.

Animal Husbandry↗
PubMed1986

Electro-immobilization versus mechanical restraint in an avoid-avoid choice test for ewes.

A Y-maze avoid-avoid choice test was used to elucidate pregnant ewes' relative preference for electro-immobilization as opposed to restraint by a squeeze-tilt table. Choices in successive trials evaluating three commercial electro-immobilizers were: electro-immobilizer-13, 13 and 8% for respective models; squeeze-tilt table-79, 57 and 71%; and no choice-8, 30 and 21%. In all trials combined, 56% of the ewes never chose the electro-immobilizer after once experiencing it, while 94% did choose the squeeze-tilt table one or more times after being restrained by it. Most ewes became more willing to enter the table as experience with it increased, but those that had been both electro-immobilized and table-restrained became more hesitant to pass the test facility's entrance gate as these experiences increased. Ewes accepted a feed reward only reluctantly if at all after being electro-immobilized, but readily after table restraint. Electro-immobilization was clearly more aversive to the ewes than was restraint by a squeeze/tilt table. When restraint by either electro-immobilization or squeeze/tilt table is necessary, use of the table would be indicated in terms of its being less aversive.

Animals↗