Abstract: The aim of this study was to investigate the use of items intended to provide enrichment during turnout, both for individual and group kept horses in an attempt to reduce the amount of passive behaviours. The study was divided into two parts, where study 1 involved eight horses rotated through eight individual paddocks, each containing one of seven enrichment items and one paddock being kept without item, functioning as a control. The horses' item-directed behaviours; passive behaviours or other non-item related activities were scored using instantaneous sampling, every minute for 1 h at the beginning and the end of the turnout period. Study 2 involved six horse groups (3-6 horses) and the same scoring methods and ethogram as in study 1. The four items that the horses interacted the most with during study 1 (straw STRA, ball filled with concentrates CBALL, branches BRAN and scratching pole POLE) are investigated in study 2. In addition, the amount of social interactions was recorded. Both horses kept individually (P < 0.05) and in groups (P < 0.0001) performed significantly more item-directed behaviours towards edible items like STRA and CBALL than other objects. There was, however, no overall relation between the numbers of item-directed behaviours and the number of passive behaviours observed, indicating that the enrichment items did not alone reduce the amount of passive behaviours during turnout periods. Such a reduction was, however, only apparent when horses spent more time eating green leaves growing on the paddock surface (R = -0.97 study 1, R = -0.67 study 2, P < 0.0001). Access to STRA in group kept horses also seemed to reduce the amount of agonistic behaviours (P < 0.0001). In conclusion, if grass is not available in paddocks, the provision of roughage reduces the amount of passive behaviours in singly kept horses and it also reduces the risk of agonistic interactions between horses kept in group.

Abstract: A previously described (Windschnurer et al., 2009) avoidance distance test was used to assess animals’ fear of humans in order to quantify the human–animal relationship (HAR). This study investigated the influence of the dominant and flightiest animals within a group on the responsiveness of animals during the avoidance distance test. Eighty-eight pregnant heifers comprised of four different genotypes were used (22 animals per genotype): Limousin × Holstein-Friesian, Limousin × Simmental, Charolais × Limousin, and Charolais × Simmental. Sixty of the 88 heifers were group housed (n = 5) into 12 pens with 3 pens per breed, while 28 heifers were singly housed (seven heifers per breed). A reactivity test was performed on days 10, 18, 25 and 30 post-housing on the singly housed heifers, and then on the group housed heifers, on the same days, to calculate a reactivity score. On days 33 and 37 flight and dominance tests, respectively, were performed to identify the flightiest and the dominant animal within each group. On day 41, an avoidance test, measuring both the avoidance distance towards a familiar and an unfamiliar human, was performed on all heifers. No difference (P > 0.05) in reactivity scores was found between the genotypes, between pens for the group housed heifers or between singly housed and group housed heifers (P = 0.28). The avoidance distance (AD) of singly (S) housed heifers towards a familiar (F) (ADSF) human was shorter (P < 0.001) than the avoidance distance of group (G) housed heifers towards an unfamiliar human (ADSU). The ADSF and ADGF were correlated with the ADSU and ADGU (R = 0.87 for singly housed heifers; R = 0.61 for group housed heifers, P < 0.001). For the singly housed heifers, no correlation was observed between reactivity score and ADSF (R = 0.36, P = 0.18), whereas the reactivity score and ADSU were correlated (R = 0.68, P = 0.004). For the group housed heifers no significant correlation was detected between the reactivity score and ADGF (R = 0.18, P = 0.22) or ADGU (R = &#8722;0.11, P = 0.39). No influence of the most dominant animal and the flightiest animals was found on the behaviour of the group in term of avoidance distance and reactivity (P > 0.05). It is concluded that the assessment of the fear of the animals towards humans using the avoidance test at the feed bunk may be useful for singly and group housed heifers and that the leaders of a group such as the flightiest animal or the dominant animal did not influence the avoidance distance test.

Abstract: Neighboring territory owners are often less aggressive toward each other than to strangers (“dear enemy” effect). There is, however, little evidence for territorial defense coalitions whereby a neighbor will temporarily leave his/her own territory, enter that of a neighbor, and cooperate in repelling a conspecific intruder. This is surprising, as theoreticians have long posited the existence of such coalitions and the circumstances under which they should evolve. Here we document territorial defense coalitions in the African fiddler crab Uca annulipes, which lives in large colonies wherein each male defends a burrow and its surrounding area against neighbors and “floaters” (burrowless males). Fights between a resident and a floater sometimes involve another male who has left his territory to fight the floater challenging his neighbor. Using simple experiments, we provide the first evidence of the rules determining when territorial coalitions form. Our results support recent models that suggest that these coalitions arise from by&#8208;product mutualism.