Abstract: Seven experiments were conducted on four miniature pigs to determine: (1) whether the pigs can discriminate between people wearing the same coloured clothing; (2) what cues they rely on if they could discriminate. For 2 weeks before the experiments began, the pigs were conditioned in a Y-maze to receive raisins from the rewarder wearing dark blue coveralls. They were then given the opportunity to choose the rewarder or non-rewarder in these experiments. Each session consisted of 20 trials. Successful discrimination was that the pig chose the rewarder at least 15 times in 20 trials (P<0.05: by χ2-test). In Experiment 1, both rewarder and non-rewarder wore dark blue coveralls. By 20 sessions, all pigs successfully identified the rewarder. In Experiment 2: (1) both wore coveralls of the same new colours or (2) one of them wore coveralls of new colours. They significantly preferred the rewarder even though the rewarder and/or non-rewarder wore coveralls of new colours. In Experiment 3, both wore dark blue coveralls but olfactory cues were obscured and auditory cues were not given. The pigs were able to identify the rewarder successfully irrespective of changing auditory and olfactory cues. In Experiment 4, both wore dark blue coveralls but covered part of their face and body in different ways. The correct response rate decreased when a part of the face and the whole body of the rewarder and non-rewarder were covered. In Experiment 5, both wore dark blue coveralls and changed their apparent body size by shifting sitting position. The correct response rate increased as the difference in body size between the experimenters increased. In Experiment 6, the distance between the experimenters and the pig was increased by 30 cm increments. The correct response rate of each pig decreased as the experimenters receded from the pig, but performance varied among the pigs. In Experiment 7, the light intensity of the experimental room was reduced from 550 to 80 lx and then to 20 lx. The correct response rate of each pig decreased with the reduction in light intensity, but all the pigs discriminated the rewarder from the non-rewarder significantly even at 20 lx. In conclusion, the pigs were able to discriminate between people wearing coveralls of the same colour after sufficient reinforcement. These results indicate that pigs are capable of using visual cues to discriminate between people.

Abstract: This experiment examines the cues used by cattle to discriminate between people, particularly the role played by facial cues. We trained and tested eight Holstein cows 5 days each week for 2 months. For each cow, we used two people, a rewarder and a non-rewarder, of different size and dressed in overalls of the same colour. The operant chamber was a large box within which stood the two people. The cow could see, smell and touch each person. A lever was placed in front of each person. When the cow pushed the lever in front of the rewarder, it received 75 g of concentrate and nothing when it pushed on the other one. For each test session, the cows made 10 choices. The placement of the people was determined randomly according to the Gellerman series. The success criterion was defined as at least eight correct choices out of 10 trials for two consecutive sessions (binomial law P<0.003). During the shaping, seven cows out of eight learned to press the lever to obtain the food. The cows were then tested in a series of 10 trials with only the rewarder present. Seven out of seven cows succeeded in reaching the success criterion. In experiment 1, both the rewarder and the non-rewarder were present and standing upright at normal height and in full view of the cow. Five out of seven cows achieved the success criterion. In experiment 2, the cows could see only the faces of the two people. None of the cows were able to reach the success criterion. In experiment 3, both people were present standing up and wearing identical masks that completely covered their heads. Five cows out of five achieved the success criterion. In experiment 4, we changed the relative height of the people. Five cows out of five succeeded when the two people stood so they were of equal height but with their faces visible. However, no cows succeeded when the people were both of equal height and had their faces covered. This study suggests that cows seem to use multiple cues to discriminate between people. Cows appear able to use either body height or the face to discriminate between people but use of the face alone is more difficult when the cows cannot see the rest of the body.

Abstract: It is believed that environmental enrichment techniques can play an important part in creating suitable captive environments for horses. There has, however, been little scientific investigation into the effectiveness of 'stable-toys' which claim to reduce the performance of equine stereotypies. This study investigated the effect of a foraging device known as 'The Equiball' on equine stereotypies. Six horses were given their evening feed in an Equiball, and the occurence of stereotypic behaviour recorded using scan sampling of video observations. Pre-enrichment, horses spent a mean(SD) of 5.27 ? 8.17 per cent of their time in the stable performing stereotypies; and significant individual variation in mean time performing stereotypic behaviour was found (P < 0.05). Several peaks in stereotypy over the day were found, the two main ones corresponding to the times before feeding. A reduction in stereotypic behaviour in five horses, and a small increase in stereotypic behaviour in one horse was observed during enrichment. During enrichment, there was an overall trend for stereotypic behaviour to decrease (P < 0.1). When used in conjunction with other measures such as behaviour therapy, companionship, increased exercise, and so on, the Equiball may help to create an environment less likely to lead to the development of stereotypic behaviours.

Abstract: We review the existence of teams in animal societies. Teams have previously been dismissed in all but a tiny minority of insect societies. “Team” is a term not generally used in studies of vertebrates. We propose a new rigorous definition of a team that may be applied to both vertebrate and invertebrate societies. We reconsider what it means to work as a team or group and suggest that there are many more teams in insect societies than previously thought. A team task requires different subtasks to be performed concurrently for successful completion. There is a division of labor within a team. Contrary to previous reviews of teams in social insects, we do not constrain teams to consist of members of different castes and argue that team members may be interchangeable. Consequently, we suggest that a team is simply the set of individuals that performs a team task. We contrast teams with groups and suggest that a group task requires the simultaneous performance and cooperation of two or more individuals for successful completion. In a group, there is no division of labor--each individual performs the same task. We also contrast vertebrate and invertebrate teams and find that vertebrate teams tend to be associated with hunting and are based on individual recognition. Invertebrate teams occur in societies characterized by a great deal of redundancy, and we predict that teams in insect societies are more likely to be found in large polymorphic (“complex”) societies than in small monomorphic (“simple”) societies.

Abstract: Vagrant non-breeding ravens frequently attract conspecifics to rich ephemeral food sources. There, grouping may allow them to overcome the defence of territorial breeders. Here, we focus on ravens making use of regular food supplies in a game park, where they divert food from the provision of park animals. We investigated if ravens foraging in the Cumberland game park (Gr&uuml;nau, Austria) are attentive towards one another when they experience some unpredictability in food provisioning. We confronted a group of 30-50 ravens with two different treatments. Ten minutes ahead of the feeding of either wolves or wild boars we showed buckets containing pieces of meat to the ravens flying overhead. In the reliable cue treatment (RCT), the meat was placed next to one of the two enclosures, whereas in the unreliable cue treatment (UCT), the buckets were placed simultaneously in front of both enclosures though only in one of the enclosures were the animals fed 10 min later. Thus, during RCT but not during UCT, ravens could predict where food would become available. Only during UCT, ravens moved in large groups between the two feeding sites. Many ravens moving at the same time in the same direction may indicate some co-ordination in space and time, which is most likely achieved by social attraction among individuals. Furthermore, the number of ravens approaching and leaving, respectively, a feeding site cross-correlated with a temporary increase in the rate of a food-associated call, the yell. This suggests that in addition to watching each other, calling may have contributed to group formation. Possible benefits of group formation during food inspection are discussed.