|
|
Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274.
Abstract: 300 Multiple ChoicesThis is a pdf-only article and there is no markup to show you.full-text.pdf
|
|
|
|
Figueroa, J., Solà-Oriol, D., Manteca, X., & Pérez, J. F. (2013). Social learning of feeding behaviour in pigs: Effects of neophobia and familiarity with the demonstrator conspecific. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 148(1), 120–127.
Abstract: Social interactions facilitate animals learning of new features of their environment minimizing a trial and error process. It has been observed in some species that food cues can be acquired by one individual (the observer) from an animal model (demonstrator) due to social learning. Three experiments were performed to evaluate whether weaned piglets may show a preference for a flavoured feed following brief social interactions (30min) with an experienced demonstrator. After the social interaction between demonstrator and observer pigs, a 30-min choice test between the flavoured feed previously eaten by demonstrators (DEM-feed) and other flavoured feed (OTH-feed; Exp. 1 and 2) or a known unflavoured starter diet (Exp. 3) was performed with observer animals. Greater intake of DEM-feed occurred when demonstrators and observers were from the same pen (Exp. 1) or from the same litter (Exp. 2), but not when observers and demonstrators were unfamiliar with each other (Exp. 1). Observers also preferred flavours previously eaten by the demonstrator over their unflavoured diet already known. Social interactions with a conspecific pig that had a recent experience with a flavoured feed enhanced the preference for that feed and could even override neophobia to a new feed. The familiarity of conspecific demonstrators plays a key role in social learning of new feed cues probably due to selective exploration involving closer snout-to-snout contacts with kin conspecifics.
|
|
|
|
Briefer, E. F., & McElligott, A. G. (2013). Rescued goats at a sanctuary display positive mood after former neglect. Appl Anim Behav Sci, 146.
|
|
|
|
Pérez-Barbería, F. J., & Gordon, I. J. (2005). Gregariousness increases brain size in ungulates. Oecologia, 145.
|
|
|
|
Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2012). Trophic cascades in Yellowstone: The first 15 years after wolf reintroduction. Biol Conserv, 145.
|
|
|
|
Murray, L. M. A., Byrne, K., & D’Eath, R. B. (2013). Pair-bonding and companion recognition in domestic donkeys, <em>Equus asinus</em>. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 143(1), 67–74.
Abstract: Pair and social bonding has been documented in various taxa, where pair formations are often described as being driven by kinship or sexual motivation. However, pair-bonding between unrelated individuals where sexual motivation is not a factor is not well documented. Many social relationships and pair-bonds between members of a dyad are facilitated by each individual's ability to recognise their partner using cues which are characteristic of that particular individual. The aims of this study were i) to investigate the existence of pair-bonding in domestic donkeys and ii) to determine whether members of a dyad could recognise their companion during a Y-maze recognition test. Subjects were 55 unrelated donkeys (38 gelded males, 15 females) in seven groups of mixed or same sex, comprising 4?14 individuals. Spatial proximity (nearest-neighbour) was observed three times a day over a 22-day period. Using a simulation approach based on observed data to generate randomised nearest-neighbour matrices, the statistical significance of social relationships was estimated. Of these, 42 (79.2%) were involved in significantly (p<0.05) non-random nearest-neighbour relationships, most of which were reciprocal pair relationships. Based on the spatial data, 24 of the donkeys which had shown significant reciprocal nearest-neighbour preferences for one individual (companion) were then used in a Y-maze recognition test in which they were presented with a choice of their companion and either a familiar donkey from the same group or an unfamiliar donkey from a different group. Donkeys? spatial location in the Y-maze demonstrated a preference for their companion versus familiar (one sample Wilcoxon signed rank test, W=239, p=0.002) or unfamiliar donkeys (W=222, p=0.041). These results verify anecdotal evidence from donkey handlers that donkeys often form pair-bonds, and show that reciprocal social preference and recognition are the basis of these. Pair-bond formation and companionship among donkeys have potential implications for their management, husbandry and welfare.
|
|
|
|
Briard, L., Deneubourg, J. - L., & Petit, O. (2017). How stallions influence the dynamic of collective movements in two groups of domestic horses, from departure to arrival. Behav. Process., 142, 56–63.
Abstract: Abstract The role of leader in polygynous species has been solely attributed to the male for some time, but recent studies shown decision making to be distributed within the group. However, the specific reproductive strategy and behavioural repertoire of males in polygynous species such as horses may mean that these individuals still have the potential to play a specific role during decision-making. To investigate this subject, we thoroughly studied the behaviour of two domestic stallions during collective movements of their group. We found that they initiated rarely and sometimes failed to recruit the entire group. When departing as followers, they did not accelerate the joining process. Both stallions preferentially occupied the rear position and exhibited numerous monitoring behaviours. Herding behaviours were performed by only one stallion and mostly occurred outside movement context. Finally, we removed this herding stallion from its group to evaluate how the group dynamic changed. As a result, half of the collective movements were five times slower and mares were more dispersed in comparison when the stallion was in the group. Overall, our results suggest that, the two stallions maintained their role of group monitors from departure to arrival. Their influence on the movement dynamic was indirect and did not play a specific role in the process of decision making.
|
|
|
|
Albiach-Serrano, A., Bräuer, J., Cacchione, T., Zickert, N., & Amici, F. (2012). The effect of domestication and ontogeny in swine cognition (Sus scrofa scrofa and S. s. domestica). Appl Anim Behav Sci, 141.
|
|
|
|
Christensen, J. W., Søndergaard, E., Thodberg, K., & Halekoh, U. (2011). Effects of repeated regrouping on horse behaviour and injuries. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 133(3), 199–206.
Abstract: Domestic horses are faced with social challenges throughout their lives due to limitations in social contact, space restrictions and frequent changes in social companionship. This is in contrast to natural conditions where horses live in relatively stable harem bands. Currently, little is known about how repeated regrouping affect horse behaviour and welfare, and it is unknown whether horses may adapt to regrouping. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of an unstable group structure, caused by weekly regroupings, on behaviour and frequency of injuries in young horses. Forty-five horses were included in the study and were randomly assigned to the treatments; Stable (S; seven groups of three horses) or Unstable (U; eight groups of three horses). The experimental period lasted 7 weeks, during which horses in Stable groups remained in the same group, whereas one horse was exchanged between Unstable groups every week. The groups were kept in 80m×80m grass-covered enclosures and were fed additional roughage on the ground daily. Social interactions were recorded in Unstable groups immediately after each regrouping (30min), and in both Stable and Unstable groups on day 1, 3 and 6 after each regrouping (2×20min/group/day). Injuries were scored by the end of the experimental period. The level of aggression shown by horses in Unstable groups immediately after regrouping was not affected by week (F5,35=0.42, P=0.83), indicating that horses neither habituated, nor sensitized, to repeated regrouping. Compared to horses in Stable groups, more agonistic behaviour was shown by horses in Unstable groups (i.e. non-contact agonistic; F1,65=5.60, P=0.02), whereas there was no treatment effect on other variables. The level of play behaviour appeared, however, to be more variable in Unstable groups. There was a significant effect of week on the level of contact agonistic interactions as well as greeting behaviour, due to a high occurrence in weeks 4-6. Non-contact agonistic interactions constituted the major part of agonistic interactions (66%). Possibly as consequence, no serious injuries were registered and there was no treatment effect (U=184; P=0.11). We conclude that the behaviour of young horses is affected by group management, and that horses appear not to adapt to weekly regroupings.
|
|
|
|
Jørgensen, G. H. M., Liestøl, S. H. - O., & Bøe, K. E. (2011). Effects of enrichment items on activity and social interactions in domestic horses (Equus caballus). Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 129(2), 100–110.
Abstract: The aim of this study was to investigate the use of items intended to provide enrichment during turnout, both for individual and group kept horses in an attempt to reduce the amount of passive behaviours. The study was divided into two parts, where study 1 involved eight horses rotated through eight individual paddocks, each containing one of seven enrichment items and one paddock being kept without item, functioning as a control. The horses' item-directed behaviours; passive behaviours or other non-item related activities were scored using instantaneous sampling, every minute for 1h at the beginning and the end of the turnout period. Study 2 involved six horse groups (3-6 horses) and the same scoring methods and ethogram as in study 1. The four items that the horses interacted the most with during study 1 (straw STRA, ball filled with concentrates CBALL, branches BRAN and scratching pole POLE) are investigated in study 2. In addition, the amount of social interactions was recorded. Both horses kept individually (P<0.05) and in groups (P<0.0001) performed significantly more item-directed behaviours towards edible items like STRA and CBALL than other objects. There was, however, no overall relation between the numbers of item-directed behaviours and the number of passive behaviours observed, indicating that the enrichment items did not alone reduce the amount of passive behaviours during turnout periods. Such a reduction was, however, only apparent when horses spent more time eating green leaves growing on the paddock surface (R=-0.97 study 1, R=-0.67 study 2, P<0.0001). Access to STRA in group kept horses also seemed to reduce the amount of agonistic behaviours (P<0.0001). In conclusion, if grass is not available in paddocks, the provision of roughage reduces the amount of passive behaviours in singly kept horses and it also reduces the risk of agonistic interactions between horses kept in group.
|
|
