Abstract: Abstract The right brain hemisphere, connected to the left eye, coordinates fight and flight behaviors in a wide variety of vertebrate species. We investigated whether left eye vision predominates in dairy cows’ interactions with other cows and humans, and whether dominance status affects the extent of visual lateralization. Although we found no overall lateralization of eye use to view other cows during interactions, cows that were submissive in an interaction were more likely to use their left eye to view a dominant animal. Both subordinate and older cows were more likely to use their left eye to view other cattle during interactions. Cows that predominantly used their left eye during aggressive interactions were more likely to use their left eye to view a person in unfamiliar clothing in the middle of a track by passing them on the right side. However, a person in familiar clothing was viewed predominantly with the right eye when they passed mainly on the left side. Cows predominantly using their left eyes in cow-to-cow interactions showed more overt responses to restraint in a crush compared with cows who predominantly used their right eyes during interactions (crush scores: left eye users 7.9, right eye users 6.4, standard error of the difference = 0.72). Thus, interactions between 2 cows and between cows and people were visually lateralized, with losing and subordinate cows being more likely to use their left eyes to view winning and dominant cattle and unfamiliar humans.

Abstract: This study replicated an unreported finding observed in a color perception experiment (Pick, Lovell, Brown, & Dail, 1994) where, after using the method of successive approximations to train a blue-gray discrimination, red-gray trials were initiated without further training. Although a gray choice had never been reinforced, the subject chose gray on the first 20 trials (p < .000001). In the study reported here, a horse was trained to approach a red feed bucket and not a green feed bucket. After the subject mastered the discrimination, a blue bucket was substituted for the previously reinforced red bucket. With double-blind controls in place, the subject chose the unreinforced green bucket on 15 out of the first 20 blue-green trials yielding a binomial p = 0.0148 that this outcome could be due to chance alone. These results are contrary to all behavioristic psychological learning theories, but consistent with prospect theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979). Prospect theory predicts that given a choice between two previously unreinforced stimuli, one familiar and the other novel, humans will choose the familiar. It is argued that the bias toward the familiar is the basis to a heuristic that has a genetic origin and should exist in other animals on the phylogenetic scale. The results of this study indicate that the heuristic is available at least as far down the scale as the horse. Conceptual replications using shape stimuli and sound stimuli are in progress.

Abstract: The complex housing environment and the close contact between humans and horses in equine sports place high demands on the learning capacity of horses. To date only limited information is available on the learning ability of the horse including higher order cognition. A type of higher order cognition is to perceive and discriminate quantities. Several mammals and birds have shown to be capable of discriminating objects due to their quantity (Brannon and Roitman, 2003). With regard to horses, there are only few studies available concerning their numerosity judgment (Uller and Lewis, 2009) and this ability is discussed controversially (Henselek et al, 2012). Possibly, the legacy of ‘‘Clever Hans’’ overshadowed further research on numerical capacity in horses, a horse to whom several psychologists incorrectly attributed the capacity of symbolic calculation (Pfungst, 1907; Rosenthal, 1965). In the present study we wanted to show whether Shetland ponies are able to transfer a previously learned concept of sameness to a numerosity judgment. The base of the test design was a “matching to sample” task, where the ponies had learned to relate abstract symbols to another which were presented on a LCD screen. Three Shetland ponies, which previously solved the matching to sample task, were tested in two test phases. In the first test phase different quantities of dots were presented (1 vs. 2; 2 vs. 3; 3 vs. 4; 4 vs. 5). To exclude discrimination due to the shape of the stimuli, the dots were varied in size and arrangement. The stimuli were presented in a triangular arrangement on the LCD screen; the sample stimulus was presented in the middle above and the discrimination stimuli in the two lower corners (S+ and S-). The pony received a food reward, by choosing the positive stimulus (S+). When the negative stimulus (S-) was chosen, the pony entered the next trial. Each learning session consisted of 20 decision trials. To investigate whether the numerosity judgment was transferable to mixed geometrical symbols (tri-, rectangle, rhomb, dot and cross) a second test phase was designed. All of the three Shetland ponies met the learning criterion of the first test phase (80% correct responses in two consecutive sessions) within the first eight sessions. One pony could transfer all judgments to the mixed symbols (up to 4 vs. 5), another pony up to 3 vs. 5 and the third on the level 2 vs. 3. These are the first reported findings that ponies are able to discriminate up to five objects. The numerosity judgment seemed to be easier for the ponies when homogenous objects were presented, than in the case of heterogeneous symbols. The reaction of the ponies occurred within few seconds, suggesting that the animals used subitizing for their numerosity judgment.
Keywords:
Cognition, numerical capacity, numerosity judgment, Shetland ponys
References:
Brannon E, Roitman J (2003) Nonverbal representations of time and number in animals and human infants. In: Meck WH (ed) Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 143–182
Henselek Y, Fischer J, Schloegl C (2012) Does the stimulus type influence horses’ performance in a quantity discrimination task? Front Psychol 3:504
Pfungst O (1907) Der Kluge Hans. Ein Beitrag zur nicht-verbalen Kommunikation. 3rd edn. (reprint of the original 1983) Frankfurter Fachbuchhandlung für Psychologie, Frankfurt
Rosenthal R (1965) Clever Hans: the horse of Mr. Von Osten. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York
Uller C, Lewis J (2009) Horses (Equus caballus) select the greater of two quantities in small numerical sets. Anim Cogn 12:733–738

Abstract: Camera trapping is a relatively new addition to the wildlife survey repertoire in Australia. Its rapid adoption has been unparalleled in ecological science, but objective evaluation of camera traps and their application has not kept pace. With the aim of motivating practitioners to think more about selection and deployment of camera trap models in relation to research goals, we reviewed Australian camera trapping studies to determine how camera traps have been used and how their technological constraints may have affected reported results and conclusions. In the 54 camera trapping articles published between 1991 and 2013, mammals (86%) were studied more than birds (10%) and reptiles (3%), with small to medium-sized mammals being most studied. Australian camera trapping studies, like those elsewhere, have changed from more qualitative to more complex quantitative investigations. However, we found that camera trap constraints and limitations were rarely acknowledged, and we identified eight key issues requiring consideration and further research. These are: camera model, camera detection system, camera placement and orientation, triggering and recovery, camera trap settings, temperature differentials, species identification and behavioural responses of the animals to the cameras. In particular, alterations to animal behaviour by camera traps potentially have enormous influence on data quality, reliability and interpretation. The key issues were not considered in most Australian camera trap papers and require further study to better understand the factors that influence the analysis and interpretation of camera trap data and improve experimental design.

Abstract: Summary Reliable assessment of animal populations is a long-standing challenge in wildlife ecology. Technological advances have led to widespread adoption of camera traps (CTs) to survey wildlife distribution, abundance and behaviour. As for any wildlife survey method, camera trapping must contend with sources of sampling error such as imperfect detection. Early applications focused on density estimation of naturally marked species, but there is growing interest in broad-scale CT surveys of unmarked populations and communities. Nevertheless, inferences based on detection indices are controversial, and the suitability of alternatives such as occupancy estimation is debatable. We reviewed 266 CT studies published between 2008 and 2013. We recorded study objectives and methodologies, evaluating the consistency of CT protocols and sampling designs, the extent to which CT surveys considered sampling error, and the linkages between analytical assumptions and species ecology. Nearly two-thirds of studies surveyed more than one species, and a majority used response variables that ignored imperfect detection (e.g. presence?absence, relative abundance). Many studies used opportunistic sampling and did not explicitly report details of sampling design and camera deployment that could affect conclusions. Most studies estimating density used capture?recapture methods on marked species, with spatially explicit methods becoming more prominent. Few studies estimated density for unmarked species, focusing instead on occupancy modelling or measures of relative abundance. While occupancy studies estimated detectability, most did not explicitly define key components of the modelling framework (e.g. a site) or discuss potential violations of model assumptions (e.g. site closure). Studies using relative abundance relied on assumptions of equal detectability, and most did not explicitly define expected relationships between measured responses and underlying ecological processes (e.g. animal abundance and movement). Synthesis and applications. The rapid adoption of camera traps represents an exciting transition in wildlife survey methodology. We remain optimistic about the technology's promise, but call for more explicit consideration of underlying processes of animal abundance, movement and detection by cameras, including more thorough reporting of methodological details and assumptions. Such transparency will facilitate efforts to evaluate and improve the reliability of camera trap surveys, ultimately leading to stronger inferences and helping to meet modern needs for effective ecological inquiry and biodiversity monitoring.