|
Munsters, C. C. B. M., Visser, K. E. K., van den Broek, J., & Sloet van Oldruitenborgh-Oosterbaan, M. M. (2012). The influence of challenging objects and horse-rider matching on heart rate, heart rate variability and behavioural score in riding horses. The Veterinary Journal, 192(1), 75–80.
Abstract: A good horse-rider ‘match’ is important in the context of equine welfare. To quantify the influence of repetition and horse-rider matching on the stress of horses encountering challenging objects, 16 Warmblood horses were ridden in a test-setting on three occasions. On each occasion the horse was ridden by a different rider and was challenged by three objects (A–C). Heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (HRV) of horse and rider, and behaviour score (BS) of the horse were obtained for each object and as a total for each test. The horse-rider interaction was evaluated with each combination and assessed as ‘matching’ or ‘mismatching’, and the horses were categorised as ‘compliant’, ‘partly-compliant’ or ‘non-compliant’. Horses exhibited a decreased HR (P = 0.015) and a decreased BS (P = 0.004) within and across different tests. ‘Matching’ horse-rider combinations exhibited less stress as indicated by reduced HR (‘match’ 69 ± 10 vs. ‘mismatch’ 72 ± 9, P = 0.001) and BS (‘match’ 1.9 ± 1.1 vs. ‘mismatch’ 3.8 ± 1.4, P = 0.017) of the horse. ‘Compliant’ (68 ± 8, P < 0.001) and ‘partly-compliant’ (71 ± 9, P = 0.002) horses had significantly lower HR than ‘non-compliant’ (75 ± 9) animals. The findings of the study indicate that HR and BS measurements support a subjective ‘match’ diagnosis and HR measurement may be a valuable tool in assessing horse compliance.
|
|
|
Briefer, E. F., Padilla de la Torre, M., & McElligott, A. G. (2012). Mother goats do not forget their kids' calls. Proc R Soc B, 279.
|
|
|
Ripple, W. J., & Beschta, R. L. (2012). Trophic cascades in Yellowstone: The first 15 years after wolf reintroduction. Biol Conserv, 145.
|
|
|
Blanco, J. C., & Yolanda, C. (2012). Surveying wolves without snow: a critical review of the methods used in Spain. Hystrix. Ital J Mammal, 23.
|
|
|
Passilongo, D., Dessi-Fulgheri, F., Gazzola, A., Zaccaroni, M., & Apollonio, M. (2012). Wolf counting and individual acoustic discrimination by spectrographic analysis [Abstract]. Bioacoustics, 21.
|
|
|
Zaccaroni, M., Passilongo, D., Buccianti, A., Dessi-Fulgheri, F., Facchini, C., & Gazzola, A. (2012). Group specific vocal signature in free- ranging wolf packs. Ethol Ecol Evol, 24.
|
|
|
Galaverni, M., Palumbo, D., Fabbri, E., Caniglia, R., Greco, C., & Randi, E. (2012). Monitoring wolves (Canis lupus) by non-invasive genetics and camera trapping: A small-scale pilot study. Eur J Wildl Res, 58.
|
|
|
Sueur, C., Deneubourg, J. - L., & Petit, O. (2012). From Social Network (Centralized vs. Decentralized) to Collective Decision-Making (Unshared vs. Shared Consensus). PLoS ONE, 7(2), e32566 EP -.
Abstract: <p>Relationships we have with our friends, family, or colleagues influence our personal decisions, as well as decisions we make together with others. As in human beings, despotism and egalitarian societies seem to also exist in animals. While studies have shown that social networks constrain many phenomena from amoebae to primates, we still do not know how consensus emerges from the properties of social networks in many biological systems. We created artificial social networks that represent the continuum from centralized to decentralized organization and used an agent-based model to make predictions about the patterns of consensus and collective movements we observed according to the social network. These theoretical results showed that different social networks and especially contrasted ones – star network vs. equal network – led to totally different patterns. Our model showed that, by moving from a centralized network to a decentralized one, the central individual seemed to lose its leadership in the collective movement's decisions. We, therefore, showed a link between the type of social network and the resulting consensus. By comparing our theoretical data with data on five groups of primates, we confirmed that this relationship between social network and consensus also appears to exist in animal societies.</p>
|
|
|
Klingel, H.. (2012). Social Organisation and Social Behaviour of the Equids. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2. International Equine Science Meeting (Vol. in press). Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: In contrast to the great similarity in behaviour and ecology of the 6 extant Equid species, 2 distinct types of social organisation have evolved, and both are adapted to life in semi-arid to arid regions where environmental conditions force them to migrate seasonally or opportunistically.
The ranges of the various species overlap: Mountain Zebra Equus zebra and Plains Zebra E. quagga in South Africa and Namibia, Plains Zebra and Grevy's Zebra E. grevyi in Kenya and Ethiopia, Grevy's Zebra and African Wild Ass E. africanus in Ethiopia, Asiatic Wild Ass E. hemionus and Przewalski Horse E. przewalski in Mongolia and China. Although, in the overlap zones, individuals of the different species are using the same resources like water and grazing next to each other, they rarely make closer contacts.
.
In the type 1 species, Horse, Plains Zebra and Mountain Zebra, the adults live in non-territorial, stable, one-male families and as single bachelors and in bachelor groups. Family stallions have the exclusive mating rights with the mares in their harems. These consist of up to 6 unrelated mares plus their offspring, totalling up to 20 members.
Mares stay in their harem until death. Stallions' tenure is from age 5-6 years, i.e. when they succeed in controlling a harem, for close to life time, but are replaced when dead or incapacitated. Harems are stable even in the absence of a stallion, indicating voluntary membership. Adolescent mares leave their parental families to become members of another harem.
In Plains Zebra the adolescent mares are abducted, during an oestrus, by suitors who fight the defending family stallion/father. Successful stallions are bachelors who start a family, or family stallions enlarging their harem. Young stallions leave their parental families voluntarily at age 2-3 years and join bachelor stallion groups from where the family stallions are recruited.
An individualised dominance hierarchy excists with the stallion in the alpha position. It is based on individual knowledge and recognition of the members.
In the type 2 species Grevy's Zebra, African Wild Ass and Asiatic Wild Ass adult stallions monopolise territories in which they have the exclusive mating rights. Stallions are tolerant of any conspecifics entering their territory. Bachelor stallions behave subordinately – or fight for the possession of the territory which is a prerequisite for reproduction.
Mares join up to form anonymous and unstable groups or herds. The only stable unit is of a mare and her offspring. In Grevy's Zebra mares with foal join preferentially conspecifics of the same soial status, as do mares without foal.
Matings take place inside the territory. There is no lasting relationship of the mare with a particular stallion, and the mare may be mated by any stallion whose territory she is visiting.
Territories measure up to 10 or more square kilometres, and tenure is for several years.
Grevy Zebra territorial owners leave their territories for a few hours to visit a water hole, or for months when grazing and water conditions are below requirements, and re-occupy it upon return, unchallenged.
|
|
|
Klingel, H.. (2012). Soziale Organisation und Sozialverhalten der Equiden. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2. International Equine Science Meeting (Vol. in press). Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: Verhalten und Ökologie der 6 rezenten Equiden sind in vieler Hinsicht identisch, jedoch in der Sozialen Organisation haben 2 deutliche verschiedene Formen evoluiert, die beide an das Leben in den semi-ariden und ariden Lebensräumen angepasst sind, wo sie zu säsonalen oder opportunistischen Wanderungen gezwungen sind.
Die Verbreitungsgebiete der verschiedenen Arten überlappen, in Südafrika und Namibia von Bergzebra Equus zebra und Steppenzebra E. quagga, in Kenya und Äthiopien von Steppenzebra und Grevy-Zebra E. grevyi, in Äthipien und Somalia von Grevy-Zebra und Afrikanischem Wildesel E. africanus, in China und der Mongolei Asiatischer Wildesel E. hemionus und Przewalski-Pferd E. przewalskii. Obwohl die Vertreter der verschiedenen Arten in den Überschneidungsgebieten die gleichen Ressourcen wie Wasser und Weide nutzen, nehmen sie kaum Kontakt zueinander auf.
Die Vertreter von Typ 1, Steppenzebra Equus quagga, Bergzebra E..zebra, Pferd E przewalskii, leben in nicht-territorialen , dauerhaften 1- Hengst- Familien, in Hengstgruppen und als Einzelgänger.. Die Familienhengste haben die alleinigen Paarungsrechte mit den Stuten in ihrem Harem. Dieser besteht aus bis zu ca. 6 nicht-verwandten Stuten nebst ihren Nachkommen und kann bis 20 Mitglieder haben.
Stuten bleiben bis zu ihrem Tod im Harem..Hengste können mit 5-6 Jahren einen Harem erobern oder gründen, können gleichfalls bis zum Tod die Familie begleiten, werden aber meist vorher von einem anderen Hengst ersetzt. Harems sind auch ohne Hengst stabil, ein Hinweis, dass die Stuten freiwilling im Harem sind und bleiben.. Junge Stuten verlassen ihre elterliche Familie und schliessen sich einem anderen Harem an..Beim Steppenzebra werden die Jungstuten während eines Östrus (Rosse) von Bewerbern entführt, gegen den Widerstand des Familenhengstes = Vaters. Bewerber sind Junggesellen, die so eine Familie gründen, und Familienhengste, die so ihren Harem vergrössern. Junghengste verlassen mit 2-3Jahren ihre elterliche Familie und schliessen sich Jungesellengruppen an, aus denen sich die Familenhengste rekrutieren.
In der Gruppe besteht eine Rangordnung mit dem Henst in der alpha-Position. Sie beruht aud individuellem Kennen und Erkennen der Mitglieder.
Bei Typ 2, Grevy-Zebra, Afrikanischer und Asiatischer Wildesel, monopolisieren Hengste über Jahre Territorien von 10 und mehr km2 , in denen sie die alleinigen Paarungsrechte haben. Territoriale Hengste tolerieren Artgenossen, auch erwachsene Hengste, soweit diese sich unterlegen verhalten. Oder sie stellen sich zum Kampf um den Besitz des Territoriums, eine Vorbedingung für die Fortpflanzung. Stuten im Östrus können von mehreren Hengsten begattet werden, wenn sie sich in deren Territorien aufhalten bzw diese durchwandern.
Stuten und Fohlen und nicht-territoriale Hengste schliessen sich zu anonymen instabilen Gruppen oder Herden zusammen. Feste dauerhafte Bindungen bestehen nur zwischen Stute und Fohlen. Hengste verlassen ihr Territorium für Stunden, Tage, im Extrem auch Monate, um zu Wasserstellen oder Weidegründen zu ziehen, sind aber bei Rückkehr wieder unangefochtene Besitzer.
|
|