| Home | << 1 2 3 4 5 >> |
|
Tomkins, L. M., McGreevy, P. D., & Branson, N. J. (2010). Lack of standardization in reporting motor laterality in the domestic dog (Canis familiaris). Journal of Veterinary Behaviour, 5(5), 235–239.
Abstract: Over the past 2 decades, numerous studies have been undertaken to assess motor laterality in the domestic dog. In anticipation of growth in this area of enquiry, we decided to review the literature on canine motor biases to identify any shortcomings, reflect on the lessons to be learned from and offer ways forward for future research into canine laterality. The aim of this review is to (i) summarize motor laterality findings in the dog, (ii) highlight areas lacking in standardization, and (iii) propose necessary criteria for future tests and global reporting protocols. Our review of the literature highlighted the lack of standardization between studies in task selection, sample size, number of behavior scores recorded, and the methods by which motor laterality were classified and reported. This review illustrates the benefits of standardizing methods of motor laterality assessment so that comparisons can be made between the populations sampled. By adopting such an approach, researchers should mutually benefit as motor laterality data could then be compared and subjected to meta-analysis.
Keywords: dog; motor laterality; lateralization; paw preference; standardization
|
|
Van de Weerd, H. A., Seaman, S., Wheeler, K., Goddard, P., & Mclean, B. (2012). Use of artificial drinkers by unhandled semi-feral ponies. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 139(1-2), 86–95.
Abstract: 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.
|
|
Wells, D. L., & Millsopp, S. (2009). Lateralized behaviour in the domestic cat, Felis silvestris catus. Anim. Behav., 78(2), 537–541.
Abstract: Lateralized behaviour in the felids has been subject to little investigation. We examined the paw use of 42 domestic cats on three tasks designed to determine whether the animals performed asymmetrical motor behaviour. The influence of the cats' sex and age on their paw preferences was also explored. The distribution of the cats' paw preferences differed significantly between the three tasks. Task 1, the most complex exercise involving retrieval of a food treat from an empty jar, encouraged the most apparent display of lateralized behaviour, with all but one animal showing a strong preference to use either their left or right paw consistently. Tasks 2 (an exercise involving reaching for a toy suspended overhead) and 3 (a challenge involving reaching for a toy moving along the ground) encouraged ambilateral motor performance. Lateralized behaviour was strongly sex related. Male and female cats showed paw preferences at the level of the population, but in opposite directions. Females had a greater preference for using their right paw; males were more inclined to adopt their left paw. Feline age was unrelated to either strength or direction of preferred paw use. Overall, the findings suggest that there are two distinct populations of paw preference in the cat that cluster strongly around the animals' sex. The results also point to a relationship between lateralized behaviour and task complexity. More apparent patterns of lateralized behaviour were evident on more complex manipulatory tasks, hinting at functional brain specialization in this species.
Keywords: cat; Felis silvestris catus; handedness; laterality; paw preference
|
|
Whiten, A., Custance, D. M., Gomez, J. C., Teixidor, P., & Bard, K. A. (1996). Imitative learning of artificial fruit processing in children (Homo sapiens) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J Comp Psychol, 110(1), 3–14.
Abstract: Observational learning in chimpanzees and young children was investigated using an artificial fruit designed as an analog of natural foraging problems faced by primates. Each of 3 principal components could be removed in 2 alternative ways, demonstration of only one of which was watched by each subject. This permitted subsequent imitation by subjects to be distinguished from stimulus enhancement. Children aged 2-4 years evidenced imitation for 2 components, but also achieved demonstrated outcomes through their own techniques. Chimpanzees relied even more on their own techniques, but they did imitate elements of 1 component of the task. To our knowledge, this is the first experimental evidence of chimpanzee imitation in a functional task designed to simulate foraging behavior hypothesized to be transmitted culturally in the wild.
|