|
|
Gadhöfer, R., Krüger, K., & Zanger, M. (2021). Der Bockhuf – Entstehung, Verlauf und Therapie. Wald: Xenophon Verlag.
|
|
|
|
Gabor, V., & Gerken, M. (2014). Shetland ponies (Equus caballus) show quantity discrimination in a matching-to-sample design. Anim. Cogn., 17(6), 1233–1243.
Abstract: Numerical competence is one of the aspects of animal cognition with a long history of research interest, but few results are available for the horse. In the present study, we investigated the ability of three Shetland ponies to discriminate between different quantities of geometric symbols presented on a computer screen in a matching-to-sample arrangement. In Experiment 1, the ponies had to relate two similar quantities to another, paired in contrasts (1 vs. 2, 3 vs. 4 and 4 vs. 5) of the same stimulus (dot). Specific pairs of quantities (all differing by one) of up to five different geometrical symbols were displayed in Experiment 2. In each session, both quantities (more and less) were used as sample in such a way that each of the two quantities presented in one test served as positive and as negative stimulus, respectively. The three Shetland ponies were able to discriminate between the given quantities of dots by showing more than 80 % correct responses in two consecutive sessions. Only one of the ponies distinguished different shapes of geometric symbols at a level of 4 versus 5 items. The results show that all ponies were capable of visual quantity discrimination in the present matching-to-sample design, but task solving seemed more difficult when quantities were composed of heterogeneous stimuli. The present results confirm our hypothesis that the ponies based their decision on the matching concept of sameness and were not biased by a spontaneous preference for higher quantities.
|
|
|
|
Fuller, T. K., & Sampson, B. A. (1988). Evaluation of a simulated howling survey for wolves. J Widl Manag, 52.
|
|
|
|
Fritts, S. H., Bangs, E. E., & Gore, J. F. (1994). The relationship of wolf recovery to habitat conservation and biodiversity in the northwestern United States. Landsc Urban Plan, 28.
|
|
|
|
Frère, C. H., Krützen, M., Mann, J., Connor, R. C., Bejder, L., & Sherwin, W. B. (2010). Social and genetic interactions drive fitness variation in a free-living dolphin population. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A., 107(46), 19949–19954.
Abstract: The evolutionary forces that drive fitness variation in species are of considerable interest. Despite this, the relative importance and interactions of genetic and social factors involved in the evolution of fitness traits in wild mammalian populations are largely unknown. To date, a few studies have demonstrated that fitness might be influenced by either social factors or genes in natural populations, but none have explored how the combined effect of social and genetic parameters might interact to influence fitness. Drawing from a long-term study of wild bottlenose dolphins in the eastern gulf of Shark Bay, Western Australia, we present a unique approach to understanding these interactions. Our study shows that female calving success depends on both genetic inheritance and social bonds. Moreover, we demonstrate that interactions between social and genetic factors also influence female fitness. Therefore, our study represents a major methodological advance, and provides critical insights into the interplay of genetic and social parameters of fitness.
|
|
|
|
Freitas, J., Lagos, L., & Álvares, F. (2021). Horses as prey of wolves. CDPnews, 23, 1–9.
|
|
|
|
Frank, H., & Frank, M. G. (1982). On the effects of domestication on canine social development and behavior. Appl Anim Ethol, 8.
|
|
|
|
Frank, H. (1980). Evolution of canine information processing under conditions of natural and artificial selection. Z Tierpsychol, 5.
|
|
|
|
Forrester, G., Hudry, K., Lindell, A., & Hopkins, W. D. (2018). Cerebral Lateralization and Cognition: Evolutionary and Developmental Investigations of Behavioral Biases (Vol. 238). Cambridge: Academic Press.
|
|
|
|
Fisher, J., & Hinde, R. A. (1994). The opening of milk bottles by birds. British Birds, (42), 347–357.
|
|
