|   | 
Details
   web
Records
Author Price, E.O.
Title Behavioral development in animals undergoing domestication Type Journal Article
Year 1999 Publication Applied Animal Behaviour Science Abbreviated Journal App Anim Behav Sci
Volume 65 Issue 3 Pages 245-271
Keywords Domestication; Domestic animals; Captivity; Behavioral development; Feral; Reintroduction
Abstract (up) The process of domestication involves adaptation, usually to a captive environment. Domestication is attained by some combination of genetic changes occurring over generations and developmental mechanisms (e.g., physical maturation, learning) triggered by recurring environmental events or management practices in captivity that influence specific biological traits. The transition from free-living to captive status is often accompanied by changes in availability and/or accessibility of shelter, space, food and water, and by changes in predation and the social environment. These changes set the stage for the development of the domestic phenotype. Behavioral development in animals undergoing domestication is characterized by changes in the quantitative rather than qualitative nature of responses. The hypothesized loss of certain behavior patterns under domestication can usually be explained by the heightening of response thresholds. Increases in response frequency accompanying domestication can often be explained by atypical rates of exposure to certain forms of perceptual and locomotor stimulation. Genetic changes influencing the development of the domestic phenotype result from inbreeding, genetic drift, artificial selection, natural selection in captivity, and relaxed selection. Experiential contributions to the domestic phenotype include the presence or absence of key stimuli, changes in intraspecific aggressive interactions and interactions with humans. Man's role as a buffer between the animal and its environment is also believed to have an important effect on the development of the domestic phenotype. The domestication process has frequently reduced the sensitivity of animals to changes in their environment, perhaps the single-most important change accompanying domestication. It has also resulted in modified rates of behavioral and physical development. Interest in breeding animals in captivity for release in nature has flourished in recent decades. The capacity of domestic animals to survive and reproduce in nature may depend on the extent to which the gene pool of the population has been altered during the domestication process and flexibility in behavioral development. “Natural” gene pools should be protected when breeding wild animals in captivity for the purpose of reestablishing free-living natural populations. In some cases, captive-reared animals must be conditioned to live in nature prior to their release.
Address
Corporate Author Thesis
Publisher Place of Publication Editor
Language Summary Language Original Title
Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title
Series Volume Series Issue Edition
ISSN 0168-1591 ISBN Medium
Area Expedition Conference
Notes Approved no
Call Number Equine Behaviour @ team @ Serial 5663
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Daniels, T.J.; Bekoff, M.
Title Feralization: The making of wild domestic animals Type Journal Article
Year 1989 Publication Behavioural Processes Abbreviated Journal Behav. Process.
Volume 19 Issue 1-3 Pages 79-94
Keywords feralization; domestication; feral dogs
Abstract (up) The widely accepted viewpoint that feralization is the reverse of domestication requires that the feralization process be restricted to populations of animals and, therefore, cannot occur in individuals. An alternative, ontogenetic approach is presented in which feralization is defined as the process by which individual domestic animals either become desocialized from humans, or never become socialized, and thus behave as untamed, non-domestic animals. Feralization will vary among species and, intraspecifically, will depend upon an individual's age and history of socialization to humans. Because feralization is not equated with morphological change resulting from evolutionary processes, species formation is not an accurate indicator of feral condition.
Address
Corporate Author Thesis
Publisher Place of Publication Editor
Language Summary Language Original Title
Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title
Series Volume Series Issue Edition
ISSN ISBN Medium
Area Expedition Conference
Notes Cited By (since 1996): 5; Export Date: 24 October 2008 Approved no
Call Number Admin @ knut @ Serial 4580
Permanent link to this record
 

 
Author Van de Weerd, H.A.; Seaman, S.; Wheeler, K.; Goddard, P.; Mclean, B.
Title Use of artificial drinkers by unhandled semi-feral ponies Type Journal Article
Year 2012 Publication Applied Animal Behaviour Science Abbreviated Journal Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci.
Volume 139 Issue 1-2 Pages 86-95
Keywords Semi-feral Dartmoor ponies; Drinking behaviour; Preference tests; Welfare
Abstract (up) This study investigated drinking behaviour of unhandled, semi-feral Dartmoor ponies. Aspects studied were drinking behaviour, latency to drink from novel unfamiliar drinkers after transport, preferences for different types of artificial water drinkers, effects of mixing with unfamiliar ponies and group size, on drinking behaviour, and the effect of a simulated market on the latency to drink. Ponies were tested in groups of three or six animals, or as individuals in test pens that were equipped with three water drinkers: bucket, automatic drinking bowl, flowing water trough. Behaviour was recorded using time-lapse video. An individual pony drank on average 10 l per day. Ponies also drank, but at a lower rate, during the night. The latencies to drink after 4.5 h of transport showed large variation, but most ponies drank within the first hour after being transported (all groups 80.5 ± 32.94 min, mean ± SEM). In the individual choice tests, the preferred drinkers were the bucket and the flowing water trough, but not the automatic drinking bowl (drinking time 25.2 ± 4.66, 11.5 ± 4.26, 2.4 ± 2.23 min for bucket, trough and bowl respectively, mean ± SEM; paired t-tests, bowl versus other drinkers, all tests p < 0.02). A possible reason for the avoidance of the automatic bowl was the noise it made when filling. After mixing a group of three ponies with a group of three unfamiliar animals, the ponies did not express their individual drinker preferences anymore. The use of the previously preferred bucket decreased significantly and the use of the initially, non-preferred, bowl increased significantly. This was likely caused by the fact that ponies were either intentionally or accidentally obstructing drinkers in certain areas of the pen and unfamiliar ponies did not want to push past them. In the simulated market, the differences in latencies to drink between ponies in the home pen and market groups did not reach significance. No significant effect of group size (groups of three versus six ponies) on drinking behaviour was detected. The results have implications for situations where only automatic water bowls are provided, such as during pony sales at livestock markets. Preventing ponies from expressing their drinking choice, either by offering non-preferred drinkers or by mixing with unfamiliar animals, could adversely affect their welfare especially if this happens in conjunction with other stressful events such as transport and markets, and potentially weaning.
Address
Corporate Author Thesis
Publisher Place of Publication Editor
Language Summary Language Original Title
Series Editor Series Title Abbreviated Series Title
Series Volume Series Issue Edition
ISSN 0168-1591 ISBN Medium
Area Expedition Conference
Notes Approved no
Call Number Equine Behaviour @ team @ Serial 5596
Permanent link to this record