Abstract: The horse's temperament, including its manageability and reactivity and/or fearfulness, is of importance as it can result in problems and can render horses unsuitable for inexperienced riders. Early experience, including handling during infancy, may influence the horse's adult behaviour and reduce its fear of humans and other potentially frigthening situations. In the various species studied, handling has generally been undertaken during the neonatal period. The aim of the present study was to test the effects of handling young horses around the time of weaning, a period which has been demonstrated to be effective in increasing ease of handling in cattle and goats. Sixteen Anglo-Arab foals were handled for 12 days either immediately following weaning (early handled: EH) or 21 days later (late handled: LH); eight additional non-handled foals served as controls (C). Handling consisted of haltering, gently petting all parts of the body, picking up feet and leading the foal over 120 m. During handling sessions, EH were easier to handle than LH: time taken to fit them with a halter, to pick up feet, and “walk-ratio” (time walking under constraint/total time walking) were significantly lower for EH. During subsequent tests conducted over 2 days, 4, and 7 months, as well as 10 months and to some extent 18 months after the end of handling period, EH and LH were easier to handle and less reactive than controls, although differences diminished with time. The period following weaning can therefore be qualified as an “optimal period” for handling. Some of the effects persist for at least 18 months.

Abstract: Social dominance is a multidimensional phenomenon occurring in all gregarious farm animals and finds its reflection in a dominance hierarchy. Hence, numerous studies have tried to analyse dominance relationships as well as to correlate outcoming results (mostly individual ranks) with other behavioural and/or physiological features of the animals. Although the concept of dominance, once established, has been developed continuously and several sociometric measures were cumulatively introduced, a consistent analysing approach has not been achieved, especially in farm animals. Thus, considerable inconsistencies in the used methodology may impair obtained results and interpretations. The present paper is a plea for a more standardised and complex approach when analysing dominance relationships, not only in farm animals. First, derived from a structural definition of dominance, we suggest in detail the preferably consistent use of appropriate sociometric measures at all social levels of analysis: the dyad as the starting level, the group as the highest level, and the individual as the basic level. Second, we applied this procedures in a case study to analyse social dominance in a group of dwarf goats (n=12) and pigs (n=10), respectively, to comparatively demonstrate benefits and problems of such an approach in two different farm animal species. It is concluded that the use of individual ranks is actually only reasonable when fundamental sociometric measures both at the dyadic level (e.g. percentage of dyads which have a significant asymmetric outcome) and at the group level (e.g. the strength of hierarchy) are successfully tested by statistical methods as also presented in this paper. The calculated sociometric measures deliver not only a more comprehensive “picture” of the social relationships within a group as simple ranks do, but also indicate possible reasons of differences in the behavioural development. For instance, whereas the dwarf goats maintained a quasi-linear dominance hierarchy over time with a high rate of overt agonistic behaviour, pigs after the establishment of their hierarchy showed a reduced agonistic behaviour which makes it questionable to calculate reliable sociometric measures. These species-dependent variations may be primarily caused by different kinds of the fighting behaviour in goats (i.e. ritualised, low costs) and pigs (i.e. more seriously, high costs). Overall, a more consistent and standardised approach of analysing social dominance in (farm) animals may improve the scientific value of single studies and makes it easier to compare various studies within a species and between species.

Abstract: In contrast to horses in pastures, it is thought that free-ranging horses do not perform latrine behaviour, i.e. a behavioural pattern whereby the animals graze and defecate in separate areas. However, few studies deal with this particular subject, reporting contrasting conclusions. We hypothesize that horses free-ranging in large heterogeneous areas do not perform latrine behaviour. Thus, we believe that grazing and elimination behaviour are spatially related: where horses graze, they will also defecate. Behavioural data were collected from Konik horses, Haflinger horses, Shetland ponies and donkeys, grazing in different nature reserves (54-80 ha). Data for the different equids were analyzed separately, as well as data for mares and stallions (Konik and donkey stallions only). We investigated the proportion of the number of defecations/urinations while grazing on the total number of defecations/urinations; furthermore, we searched for the sequence of behaviours representing latrine behaviour in the strict sense. Additionally, we analyzed the correlation between grazing behaviour and eliminative behaviour on both vegetation type level and patch level. All the female equids often continued grazing while defecating. During urination, grazing ceases in the majority of instances. Cases where a mare terminated grazing in a certain vegetation type and sward height to eliminate in another vegetation type or in another sward height within the same vegetation type were rarely observed. On the vegetation type level as well as on the patch level, there was a highly significant (P<0.001) positive correlation between grazing time and number of eliminations (or eliminating time). The high values of the correlation coefficients (in case of the defecation variables r ranges between 0.553 and 0.955; in case of the urination variables r ranges between 0.370 and 0.839) illustrate that the spatial distribution of the eliminative behaviour can be explained to a high degree by the spatial distribution of the grazing behaviour. Results in the case of the stallions are preliminary, but indicate the same pattern. Horses, free-ranging in large heterogeneous areas, do not perform latrine behaviour, but defecate where they graze. Possibly, animal density is of major importance to explain this behavioural difference with horses in pastures. We suggest that also spatial vegetation heterogeneity and plant productivity of the grazed area, as well as parasite status of the grazing animals could play a role.

Abstract: Current definitions of horse personality traits are rather vague, lacking clear, universally accepted guidelines for evaluation in performance tests. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to screen behavioural and physiological measurements taken during riding for potential links with scores the same horses received in the official stallion performance test for rideability and personality traits. Behaviour, heart rate (HR) and HR variability from thirty-six stallions participating in a performance test were recorded repeatedly during their performance test training. Using the coefficient of determination, regression analysis revealed that about 1/3 of variation (ranging between r = 0.26 (“constitution” (i.e. fitness, health)) and r = 0.46 (rideability)) in the personality trait scores could be explained by selecting the three most influential behaviour patterns per trait. These behaviour patterns included stumbling (with all traits except character), head-tossing (temperament, rideability), tail-swishing (willingness to work), involuntary change in gait (character) and the rider's use of her/his hands (constitution, rideability), voice (temperament) or whip (constitution). Subsequent mixed model analysis revealed a significant (P < 0.05) influence of the behaviour pattern “horse-induced change in gait” on character (-0.98 ± 0.31 scores per additional occurrence of change in gaits), of head-tossing (-0.25 ± 0.08 scores) and rider's use of voice (-0.51 ± 0.25; P = 0.0594) on temperament, and of stumbling on each of the following: willingness to work (-2.5 ± 1.2), constitution (-2.5 ± 1.2 scores; P = 0.0516) and rideability scores (-3.3 ± 1.4). In addition, constitution scores tended (P = 0.0889) to increase with higher low frequency/high frequency heart rate variation ratios (LF/HF), indicating a shift towards sympathetic dominance and thus a higher stress load in horses with higher scores for constitution. Rideability scores from the training phase were also significantly influenced by head-tossing (-0.5 ± 0.1), and in addition rideability scores from the final test were influenced by the training rider, ranging between average estimated rideability scores of 6.8 ± 0.4 for one training rider and 8.36 ± 0.3 scores for another training rider. Horses ridden with their nose-line predominantly behind the vertical received higher scores for rideability (8.3 ± 0.3) than horses ridden with their nose-line at the vertical (7.7 ± 0.2). These findings indicate that either judges perceive horses to have a better rideability when they readily offer a more extreme poll flexion, or that riders make use of horses’ better rideability by imposing a more extreme poll flexion. Several of the above described associations, but also of the non-existing links (e.g. no association between shying or heart rate and temperament) between behaviour patterns and scores for personality traits are rather surprising, warranting further investigation regarding the underlying causes of these relationships. Some of these behaviour patterns should be considered when redesigning the current guidelines for evaluation of personality traits during breeding horse performance tests, ultimately leading to improved genetic selection for equine personality traits. However, ethical implication of defining aversive behaviour such as head-tossing as an indicator of, for example, poor temperament, should not be neglected when devising new guidelines: such aversive behaviour may in fact be an indication of inadequate training techniques rather than poor horse personality.

Abstract: Current scores for equine personality traits assessed during performance tests are characterised by high means and inadequate variation, hampering genetic selection for these traits. A number of temperament and related behaviour tests have been developed in order to make assessment of equine personality more objective. However, rarely these tests have been validated for their use as a selection tool. Thus, as a first step the aim of the present study was to integrate a temperament tests into horse performance tests, in order to assess variability and repeatability of horses’ reactivity under the rider and the reliability of the judges’ assessment thereof. The temperament test was comprised of three novel stimuli, including a visual stimulus (BALL), a visual and tactile stimulus (GATE), and a visual and auditory stimulus (CANS). A total of 224 mares and stallions were subjected to the test during their participation in station performance tests for riding horses, and 133 of these horses were subjected to the test a second time either 2–3 weeks or 18 weeks after the first test. Horses were ridden in the test by professional riders, and their reactions to the stimuli were evaluated each by two judges and the rider using scores on a scale from 1 (task not concluded) to 10 (completely calm but attentive horse). Mean scores (±SD) ranged between 6.6 ± 2.4 (GATE) and 7.8 ± 2.1 (BALL), demonstrating lower means and considerably higher standard deviations than the same horses’ scores from present evaluation of the trait labelled temperament (8.1 ± 0.9) or related personality traits (e.g. character: 8.3 ± 0.8). Using variance components from mixed model analysis, inter-observer agreement between the two judges was for the individual stimuli very high (0.95 (BALL), 0.96 (GATE), 0.89 (CANS)), and there was likewise high agreement between the judges’ and the riders’ combined scores (0.93). Repeatabilities of horses’ scores were 0.72 (BALL), 0.75 (GATE), and 0.69 (CANS). Correlations to traits from the present evaluation of personality were low or non-existent, indicating that these traits are not a reflection of anxiety or fear reactivity as assessed by novel object tests. Horses’ improvement in judges’ combined scores from first to second test was not (P > 0.1) influenced by differences in time between tests, but differed between breed-types and individual riders. Also, not surprisingly, the higher horses’ scores in the first test were, the lower their improvement in the second test was (-0.45 ± 0.06 per additional score in the first test). Temperament tests using novel stimuli presented to horses under a rider may be a practical and valid tool for improving the current assessment of equine personality traits during performance tests. Considering a combination of absolute scores and horses’ improvement in scores of repeated tests, rather than measuring only absolute scores yields relevant information about horses’ personality, and at the same time it may prevent owners from deliberately training their horses for low reactions to the test-stimuli.