|
Robinson, H. C. (2007). Equine interspecies aggression (Vol. 160).
|
|
Huxley, J. (2006). Equine interspecies aggression (Vol. 159).
|
|
Macholc, E. J. A. (2006). Equine interspecies aggression (Vol. 159).
|
|
Aronson, L. (1998). Animal behavior case of the month. Aggression directed toward other horses. J Am Vet Med Assoc, 213(3), 358–359.
|
|
Thrower, W. R. (1970). Aggression in horses. Proc R Soc Med, 63(2), 163–167.
|
|
Kawamura, S. (1967). Aggression as studied in troops of Japanese monkeys. UCLA Forum Med Sci, 7, 195–223.
|
|
Dow, M., Ewing, A. W., & Sutherland, I. (1976). Studies on the behaviour of cyprinodont fish. III. The temporal patterning of aggression in Aphyosemion striatum (Boulenger). Behaviour, 59(3-4), 252–268.
|
|
Burden, F., & Trawford, A. (2006). Equine interspecies aggression Comment on (Vol. 159).
|
Nicol, C. J., Potzsch, C., Lewis, K., & Green, L. E. (2003). Matched concurrent case-control study of risk factors for feather pecking in hens on free-range commercial farms in the UK. Br Poult Sci, 44(4), 515–523.
Abstract: 1. The aim of the study was to compare the management and husbandry of free-range flocks in the UK where feather pecking was either present (case) or absent (control). 2. One hundred flocks were enrolled into a concurrent case-control study: 50 where birds had recently started feather pecking, and 50 matched control flocks where birds of the same age had not started feather pecking. 3. Information was obtained from a detailed interview with the flock manager, and by direct inspection of the flock, house and range. 4. Initial univariate analyses revealed that case flocks were more likely to comprise ISA Brown than Lohmann, were more likely to be restricted from litter areas to prevent floor eggs, and were less likely to use the outside range. 5. Cluster analysis indicated that feather pecking was not associated with any particular husbandry system. 6. The only influential risk factor significant in the multivariable conditional logistic regression analysis was use of the outdoor range. The risk of feather pecking was reduced 9-fold in flocks where more than 20% of birds used the range on sunny days (odds ratio = 0.12). Use of the range was positively associated with the presence of trees and/or hedges on the range.
|
Earley, R. L., & Dugatkin, L. A. (2002). Eavesdropping on visual cues in green swordtail (Xiphophorus helleri) fights: a case for networking. Proc Biol Sci, 269(1494), 943–952.
Abstract: Aggressive contests probably occur in networking environments where information about fighting ability is conveyed both to an opponent and to individuals peripheral to the fight itself, the bystanders. Our primary aim was to investigate the relative influences of eavesdropping and prior social experience on the dynamics of aggressive contests in Xiphophorus helleri. A bystander's ability to witness an encounter was manipulated using clear, one-way mirror, and opaque partitions. After watching (or not watching) the initial contest, the bystander encountered either the winner or loser of the bout. Treatment comparisons of bystander-winner or bystander-loser contest dynamics indicated the presence or absence of winner, loser, or eavesdropping effects. Winner and loser effects had negligible influences on bystander contest dynamics. Eavesdropping significantly reduced the bystander's propensity to initiate aggression, escalate, and win against seen winners regardless of whether the watched bout had escalated or not. Though eavesdropping had relatively little effect on bystander-loser contest dynamics, bystanders were less prone to initiate aggression and win against losers that had escalated in the witnessed bout. Thus, bystanders appear to preferentially retain and utilize information gained about potentially dangerous opponents (winners or persistent losers). Our data lend clear support for the importance of eavesdropping in visually based aggressive signalling systems.
|
