|
Rogers, L. (2015). Laterality in domestic and feral horses. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg, in prep. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
van Dierendonck, M. (2015). “Out of the box” – innovations and new developments in social housing for horses. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg. Wald: xenophon Publishing.
|
Maros, K., Kovács, R., & Nagy, K. (2015). Questionnaire survey personality assessment of horses of different use. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: We collected data from 248 horses of different breeds, age, sex and use, forming four groups: 74 trotters, 70 gallop horses, 60 horseback archery horses and 44 police horses. All horses were trained and ridden/driven in a regular base. Caretakers or owners who were familiar with the target animals were asked to assess their horses’ temperament. The temperament scores were obtained with the 7-point scale questionnaire according to the Horse Personality Questionnaire which has 25 items and has previously been shown to be reliable for the assessment of personality in horses. It measures six personality components in horses: Dominance, Anxiousness, Excitability, Protection, Sociability and Inquisitiveness.
Component scores were calculated according to Lloyd, A.S., Martin, J.E., Bornett-Gauci, H.L.I., Wilkinson, R.G. (2008) Horse personality: Variation between breeds. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 112. 369–383. The component scores were compared across the four examined groups using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Post hoc multiple comparisons tests were then carried out to explore specific breed differences on each component. The value of alpha was set at 0.05 for all statistical tests.
Groups differed significantly regarding Anxiousness and Excitability, but no significant differences were found regarding Dominance, Protection, Sociability or Inquisitiveness among groups. This finding is in line with the findings of Lloyd et al. (2008) who showed that Anxiousness and Excitability components have the highest level of variation between breeds.In our study, gallop horses had the highest rank regarding Excitability and they differed significantly from police horses which had the lowest rank for this personality component. Interestingly gallop horses had the lowest rank regarding Anxiousness, and trotters got the highest rank in in this component.
According to our results gallop horses are the most extreme in their personality. It is conceivable that being excitable is a more favourable trait for a race horse than for a working police horse. However, it is interesting that trotters are more anxious than gallop horses since they also have a high thoroughbred ancestry. The effect of work and training on these horses needs further surveys.
|
|
Krueger, K. (Ed.). (2015). Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
Rubenstein D.I. (2015). Networks of terrestrial ungulates: linking form and function. In D. P. & Croft D. W. Franks R. James J. Krause (Ed.), Animal Social Networks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
Krueger, K., Hollenhorst, H., Schuetz, A., & Weil, S. (2015). Social learning and innovative learning in horses. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting (Vol. 3). Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
Vidament. M. (2015). Laterality and emotions : behavioural response to an approach of a novel object by young ridden horses. In , & K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
Gabor, V., & Gerken, M. (2015). Shetland ponies (Equus caballus) show quantity discrimination. In , & K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: The complex housing environment and the close contact between humans and horses in equine sports place high demands on the learning capacity of horses. To date only limited information is available on the learning ability of the horse including higher order cognition. A type of higher order cognition is to perceive and discriminate quantities. Several mammals and birds have shown to be capable of discriminating objects due to their quantity (Brannon and Roitman, 2003). With regard to horses, there are only few studies available concerning their numerosity judgment (Uller and Lewis, 2009) and this ability is discussed controversially (Henselek et al, 2012). Possibly, the legacy of ‘‘Clever Hans’’ overshadowed further research on numerical capacity in horses, a horse to whom several psychologists incorrectly attributed the capacity of symbolic calculation (Pfungst, 1907; Rosenthal, 1965). In the present study we wanted to show whether Shetland ponies are able to transfer a previously learned concept of sameness to a numerosity judgment. The base of the test design was a “matching to sample” task, where the ponies had learned to relate abstract symbols to another which were presented on a LCD screen. Three Shetland ponies, which previously solved the matching to sample task, were tested in two test phases. In the first test phase different quantities of dots were presented (1 vs. 2; 2 vs. 3; 3 vs. 4; 4 vs. 5). To exclude discrimination due to the shape of the stimuli, the dots were varied in size and arrangement. The stimuli were presented in a triangular arrangement on the LCD screen; the sample stimulus was presented in the middle above and the discrimination stimuli in the two lower corners (S+ and S-). The pony received a food reward, by choosing the positive stimulus (S+). When the negative stimulus (S-) was chosen, the pony entered the next trial. Each learning session consisted of 20 decision trials. To investigate whether the numerosity judgment was transferable to mixed geometrical symbols (tri-, rectangle, rhomb, dot and cross) a second test phase was designed. All of the three Shetland ponies met the learning criterion of the first test phase (80% correct responses in two consecutive sessions) within the first eight sessions. One pony could transfer all judgments to the mixed symbols (up to 4 vs. 5), another pony up to 3 vs. 5 and the third on the level 2 vs. 3. These are the first reported findings that ponies are able to discriminate up to five objects. The numerosity judgment seemed to be easier for the ponies when homogenous objects were presented, than in the case of heterogeneous symbols. The reaction of the ponies occurred within few seconds, suggesting that the animals used subitizing for their numerosity judgment.
Keywords:
Cognition, numerical capacity, numerosity judgment, Shetland ponys
References:
Brannon E, Roitman J (2003) Nonverbal representations of time and number in animals and human infants. In: Meck WH (ed) Functional and neural mechanisms of interval timing. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 143–182
Henselek Y, Fischer J, Schloegl C (2012) Does the stimulus type influence horses’ performance in a quantity discrimination task? Front Psychol 3:504
Pfungst O (1907) Der Kluge Hans. Ein Beitrag zur nicht-verbalen Kommunikation. 3rd edn. (reprint of the original 1983) Frankfurter Fachbuchhandlung für Psychologie, Frankfurt
Rosenthal R (1965) Clever Hans: the horse of Mr. Von Osten. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York
Uller C, Lewis J (2009) Horses (Equus caballus) select the greater of two quantities in small numerical sets. Anim Cogn 12:733–738
|
Winwright, D., Elston, H., & Hall, C. (2015). The impact of paddock design on the behaviour of the domestic horse (Equus caballus). In , & K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: The design of a captive environment should facilitate the expression of the natural behavioural repertoire of the species concerned. The domestic horse (Equus caballus) is a social, herd dwelling species that is often housed in isolation from con-specifics or kept in groups in paddock enclosures. Although the latter allows for social interaction and does not restrict movement per se, it may not promote natural activity patterns or group cohesion. The aim of the current study was to assess the impact of two different paddock designs on the behaviour of a stable group of horses (n=6: 2 mares, 4 geldings).
The paddock designs tested were adjacent and grassed similarly, but configured differently. A central paddock (75 x 75m) designated NT, was surrounded by a track 1.6-5.5m wide, designated T. The horses were turned out in their group into T or NT for 3 consecutive days. Their behaviour was recorded for one hour three times each day (10.00, 13.00, 16.00 hrs). Within each observation period of one hour focal sampling was used, each individual horse being observed for a 10 minute period. They were then moved to the other enclosure type for a further 3 consecutive days, followed by a repeat of each condition. When turned out the horses were fitted with a global positioning system device (Garmin Forerunner 305) to monitor distance travelled and speed for the period 10.00-17.00 hrs. The mean percentage of time spent in each behavioural state (standing alert, standing resting, walk/trot, grazing, lying, social interaction) during the periods observed was calculated. Behaviour during social interactions was classified as either affiliative (approach, follow, friendly contacts, mutual grooming) or agonistic (approach and retreat, bite, chase, head threat).
The horses travelled significantly further in T than in NT (paired samples t-test: t (5) = 11.74, p<0.001) and moved significantly faster (Wilcoxon signed rank test: z = -2.21, p=0.03). See Table 1. When the percentage of time spent in each behavioural state in T and NT was compared some significant differences were found. A significantly higher percentage of time was spent active (walking /trotting) in T than in NT (paired samples t-test: t (5) = 5.74, p=0.002). Standing alert was only recorded in T (paired samples t-test: t (5) = 3.48, p=0.02). A significantly higher percentage of time was spent grazing in NT than in T (paired samples t-test: t (5) = -3.58, p=0.016). Significantly more social interaction occurred in T than in NT (paired samples t-test: t (5) = 5.93, p=0.002). See Figure 1. In T, 91% of social interactions were affiliative and 9% agonistic, whereas in NT 29% were affiliative and 71% agonistic. No difference was found in the percentage of time spent standing resting or lying down in T and NT.
The benefits of housing horses in groups as opposed to individually have been demonstrated in previous studies. In addition to better satisfying the behavioural needs of the horse it has been found that group housed horses adapt more easily to training and display less undesirable behaviour than those housed individually (Rivera et al. 2002; Søndergaard and Ladewig 2004; Visser et al. 2008). However, individual housing is frequently selected by horse owners in preference to group housing to avoid the risk of injury during agonistic encounters. Fureix et al. (2012) suggest that management practices may well contribute to aggressiveness in horses and that the conditions under which we keep horses should be reviewed. The findings of the present study indicate that the design of the enclosure in which groups of horses are kept affects the nature of social interactions. The T paddock design resulted in reduced intra-group aggression. However, this paddock design also reduced the time spent grazing and increased vigilant behaviour. Although the results demonstrate that a paddock system including tracks may facilitate group cohesion and more natural movement patterns, the long-term impact on behaviour and welfare requires further investigation.
References:
Fureix C, Bourjade M, Henry S, Sankey C, Hausberger M. (2012). Exploring aggression regulation in managed groups of horses (Equus caballus). Applied Animal Behaviour Science 138: 216-228.
Rivera E, Benjamin S, Nielsen B, Shelle J, Zanella AJ. (2002). Behavioural and physiological response of horses to initial training: the comparison between pastured versus stalled horses. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 78: 235–252.
Søndergaard E, Ladewig J. (2004). Group housing exerts a positive effect on the behaviour of young horses during training. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 87: 105-118.
|
Hollenhorst, H., Weil, S., & Krueger, K. (2015). Innovative behavour in horses (Equus caballus). In , & K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: Contrary to the widely-spread assumption that horses just have restricted cognitive capacities and are not very flexible in their behaviors, we showed that horses display innovative behavior and even make use of tools (Krueger 2015, Krueger et al. 2015). These findings derive from a database (http://innovative-behaviour.org/) the Equine behavior team managed in the past two years. Some horses did not only show single innovations, but several different innovations. The number of innovations per individual varied from 1 to 10. 20 % of all innovative horses in the database showed more than one innovation. These individuals can be called the ‘true innovators’. Moreover innovations were dependent on age. Young horses were more innovative than older ones, whereby horses at the age of five to nine years were the most innovative. When considering the housing system innovative horses in a single housing (inside box, outside box, paddock box) had a slight majority towards horses in group housing (open stable, active stable, pasture day and night). But given the fact that ratings on housing system frequencies state 95% of the horses to be kept in individual housing, innovations in individual housing are rare. Nevertheless, horses kept in inside boxes without a window, opened doors more often than all other horses. Aside from this effect, housing systems did not trigger the frequency of innovative behavior. Innovations for gaining freedom and innovations in general were widespread among horses with daily access to pasture and daily contact with conspecifics. Innovations for gaining food were not more likely to occur in horses that were fed little amounts of roughage. In conclusion, the housing of horses does not seem to be the primary catalyst for developing innovative behavior in horses. What makes a “true innovator” in horses, in addition to age, remains to be seen.
|
