Abstract: Abstract: Understanding animals" abilities to cooperate with and learn from each other has been an active field of research in recent years. One important basis for all types of social interactions is the disposition of animals to pay attention to each other-a factor often neglected in discussions and experiments. Since attention differs between species as well as between individuals, it is likely to influence the amount and type of information different species and/or observers may extract from conspecifics in any given situation. Here, we carried out a standardized comparative study on attention towards a model demonstrating food-related behavior in keas, dogs and children. In a series of experimental sessions, individuals watched different conspecific models while searching, manipulating and feeding. Visual access to the demonstration was provided by two observation holes, which allowed us to determine exactly how often and for how long observers watched the model. We found profound differences in the factors that influence attention within as well as between the tested species. This study suggests that attention should be incorporated as an important variable when testing species in social situations.

Abstract: A social hierarchy is generally assumed to exist in those mammalian societies in which the costs and benefits of group living are distributed unevenly among group members. We analysed infrared closed-circuit television footage, collected over 3 years in Wytham Woods, Oxfordshire, to test whether social groups of European badgers have dominance hierarchies. Analysis of directed aggression between dyads revealed linear dominance hierarchies in three social-group-years, but patterns within social groups were not consistent across years. Dominance hierarchies were significantly steeper than random in five out of six social-group-years. In those social-group-years where a linear hierarchy was determined, there was an effect of sex on dominance rank, with females gaining significantly higher rank than males in two social-group-years. Overall, rank was not related to age, nor did it appear to affect the likelihood of an individual being wounded, or an individual's breeding status. The latter resulted from nonorthogonality between sex and breeding status, as there were only two breeding males. Overall, hierarchies were primarily dominated by breeding females, and may occur when breeding competition arises. Relatedness, unreciprocated allogrooming and sequential allomarking were not consistently related to levels of directed aggression across social-group-years. We suggest that dominance structures within European badger groups may be context dependent, with future study required to complete our understanding of where, and when, they arise.

Abstract: Social animals have to make a multitude of group decisions on a daily basis. At the most basic level, this will involve coordination of activities and travel directions. In groups of insects, birds and fish, much of this 'coordination' can be the result of relatively simple interaction patterns among group members. Such systems are self-organizing, and often do not require specific leaders, or followers. However, in more socially complex groups, achieving collective group action-a consensus-may not be accomplished by simple rules alone. Instead, a consensus may be reached by the averaging of preferences (democracy), or by following the choices of specific leaders (despotism). In this mini-review, we discuss the conditions necessary for despotism in animal groups, and focus upon new studies investigating coordinated actions in primates. We ask how specific leaders arise and why others follow them-providing new insight into the mechanisms of effective leadership in groups characterized by strong social relationships.

Abstract: Soiled bedding influences cleanliness and disease levels in dairy cows and there is no evidence of an inherent latrine behaviour in cattle. If cows were trained to use a concrete area of the housing system as a latrine, a cleaner bed could be maintained. Thirteen group-housed, 14-16-month-old Holstein-Friesian heifers, were clicker trained with heifer-rearing concentrate pellets as a reward. Training was carried out in four phases. (Phase 1) Association of feed reward with clicker, criterion: 34/40 correct responses. (Phase 2) Simple task (nose-butting a disc) to reinforce phase 1 association, criterion: 17/20 correct responses. (Phase 3) Association of eliminative behaviour with reward where criterion was four sessions with only one incorrect response: criteria for each heifer in phases 1-3 were set using binomial tests. (Phase 4) Shaping eliminative behaviour to occur on concrete. Possible responses were, eliminating on concrete (C) or straw (S), or moving from one substrate to another immediately before eliminating: C --> S, S --> C. Heifers were rewarded for the desired behaviours C and S --> C and ignored when S and C --> S occurred. If learning was achieved, C should increase as C --> S decreased and S --> C should increase as S decreased: tested with Spearman rank correlations. All heifers achieved criterion by day 4 of phase 1 (P = 0.001); day 1 of phase 2 (P = 0.001) and day 10 of phase 3 (P < 0.009). Responses changed throughout phase 3 beginning with (i) looking at the trainer whilst voiding then moving to trainer after the click, and later including (ii) moving to trainer immediately before- or (iii) during voiding. No relationship was found between S and S --> C (rs = -0.14; P = 0.63) or C and C --> S (rs = -0.33; P = 0.25). All group members eliminated more often on concrete (580) than on straw (141) but four heifers with consistently longer lying bouts also showed more C --> S before lying down (Mann-Whitney, P = 0.007). The present study is believed to be the first reported work to show that cattle can be trained to show an awareness of their own eliminative behaviour. This was not successfully shaped to latrine behaviour, however, and it is suggested that floor type may not have been a sufficiently salient cue. Voiding on straw occurred largely with response C --> S (0.73) and general behaviour suggested that this was strongly linked to lying patterns of individual heifers.