Abstract: Reasons for performing study: Assessing back movement is an important part of clinical examination in the horse and objective assessment tools allow for evaluating success of treatment. Objectives: Accuracy and consistency of inertial sensor measurements for quantification of back movement and movement symmetry during over ground locomotion were assessed; sensor measurements were compared to optical motion capture (mocap) and consistency of measurements focusing on movement symmetry was measured. Methods: Six nonlame horses were trotted in hand with synchronised mocap and inertial sensor data collection (landmarks: T6, T10, T13, L1 and S3). Inertial sensor data were processed using published methods and symmetry of dorsoventral displacement was assessed based on energy ratio, a Fourier based symmetry measure. Limits of agreement were calculated and visualised to compare mocap and sensor data. Consistency of sensor measurements was assessed using Pearson correlation coefficients and linear regression to investigate the effect of speed on movement symmetry. Results: Dorsoventral and mediolateral sensor displacement was observed to lie within ± 4–5 mm (± 2 s.d., 9–28% of movement amplitude) and energy ratio to lie within ± 0.03 of mocap data. High levels of correlation were found between strides and trials (0.86–1.0) for each horse and each sensor and variability of symmetry was lowest for T13 followed by T10, T6, L1 and S3 with no significant effect of speed at T6, T10 and T13. Conclusions: Inertial sensor displacement and symmetry data showed acceptable accuracy and good levels of consistency for back movement. The small mediolateral movement amplitude means that changes of <25% in mediolateral amplitude (also unlikely to be detected by visual assessment) may go undetected. New sensor generations with improved sensor sensitivity and ease of use of equipment indicate good potential for use in a field situation.

Abstract: Place learning abilities represent adaptations that contribute also to foraging efficiency under given spatio-temporal conditions. We investigated if this ability in turn constrains decision making in two sympatric vole species: while the herbivorous common vole (Microtus arvalis) feeds on spatio-temporally predictable food resources (e.g. roots, tubers and shoots of plant tubers), the omnivorous bank vole (Myodes glareolus) additionally subsists on temporally unpredictable food resources (e.g. insects and seeds). Here, we compare the spatial reference memory and working memory of the two species. In an automated operant home cage with eight water places, female voles either had to learn the fixed position of non-depletable places (reference memory task) or learn and avoid previously visited water places depleted in a single visit (win-shift task). In the reference memory task, Microtus females required significantly more choices to find all water places, initially performed slightly worse than Myodes females, and displayed slightly lower asymptotic performance. Both species were highly similar in new learning of the same task. In the more complex win-shift task, asymptotic performance was significantly lower in Microtus (72% correct) than in Myodes (79%). Our results suggest that both vole species resemble each other in their efficiency to exploit habitats with low spatio-temporal complexity but may differ in their efficiency at exploiting habitats with temporally changing spatial food distributions. The results imply that spatial ability adjusted to specific food distributions may impair flexible use of habitats that differ in their food distribution and therefore, decrease a species’ chances of survival in highly dynamic environments.

Abstract: Over the last few decades, comparative cognitive research has focused on the pinnacles of mental evolution, asking all-or-nothing questions such as which animals (if any) possess a theory of mind, culture, linguistic abilities, future planning, and so on. Research programs adopting this top-down perspective have often pitted one taxon against another, resulting in sharp dividing lines. Insight into the underlying mechanisms has lagged behind. A dramatic change in focus now seems to be under way, however, with increased appreciation that the basic building blocks of cognition might be shared across a wide range of species. We argue that this bottom-up perspective, which focuses on the constituent capacities underlying larger cognitive phenomena, is more in line with both neuroscience and evolutionary biology.

Abstract: Observation of behaviour, especially social behaviour, and experimental studies of learning and brain function give us information about the complexity of concepts that animals have. In order to learn to obtain a resource or carry out an action, domestic animals may: relate stimuli such as human words to the reward, perform sequences of actions including navigation or detours, discriminate amongst other individuals, copy the actions of other individuals, distinguish between individuals who do or do not have information, or communicate so as to cause humans or other animals to carry out actions. Some parrots, that are accustomed to humans but not domesticated, can use words to have specific meanings. In some cases, stimuli, individuals or actions are remembered for days, weeks or years. Events likely to occur in the future may be predicted and changes over time taken into account. Scientific evidence for the needs of animals depends, in part, on studies assessing motivational strength whose methodology depends on the cognitive ability of the animals. Recognition and learning may be associated with changes in physiology, behaviour and positive or negative feelings. Learning and other complex behaviour can result in affect and affect can alter cognition. The demonstration of cognitive bias gives indications about affect and welfare but should be interpreted in the light of other information. All of the information mentioned so far helps to provide evidence about sentience and the level of awareness. The term sentience implies a range of abilities, not just the capacity to have some feelings. The reluctance of scientists to attribute complex abilities and feelings to non-humans has slowed the development of this area of science. Most people consider that they have obligations to some animals. However, they might protect animals because they consider that an animal has an intrinsic value, or because of their concern for its welfare. In social species, there has been selection promoting moral systems that might result in behaviours such as attempts to avoid harm to others, collaboration and other altruistic behaviour. An evaluation of such behaviour may provide one of the criteria for decisions about whether or not to protect animals of a particular species. Other criteria may be: whether or not the animal is known as an individual, similarity to humans, level of awareness, extent of feelings, being large, being rare, being useful or having aesthetic quality for humans. Cognitive ability should also be considered when designing methods of enriching the environments of captive animals.

Abstract: Neighboring territory owners are often less aggressive toward each other than to strangers (“dear enemy” effect). There is, however, little evidence for territorial defense coalitions whereby a neighbor will temporarily leave his/her own territory, enter that of a neighbor, and cooperate in repelling a conspecific intruder. This is surprising, as theoreticians have long posited the existence of such coalitions and the circumstances under which they should evolve. Here we document territorial defense coalitions in the African fiddler crab Uca annulipes, which lives in large colonies wherein each male defends a burrow and its surrounding area against neighbors and “floaters” (burrowless males). Fights between a resident and a floater sometimes involve another male who has left his territory to fight the floater challenging his neighbor. Using simple experiments, we provide the first evidence of the rules determining when territorial coalitions form. Our results support recent models that suggest that these coalitions arise from by&#8208;product mutualism.