|
Ehardt, C. L., & Bernstein, I. S. (1992). Conflict intervention behaviour by adult male macaques: structural and functional aspects. In A. H. Harcourt, & F. B. M. de Waal (Eds.), Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and Other Animals (pp. 83–111). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
Byrne, R. W. (2000). How monkeys find their way: leadership, coordination, and cognitive maps of African baboons. In S. Boinski, & P. A. Garber (Eds.), On the Move: How and Why Animals Travel in Groups (pp. 491–518). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
|
|
Holekamp, K. E., Boydston, E.E, & Smale, L. (2000). Group Travel in Social Carnivores (S. Boinski, & P. A. Garber, Eds.). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
|
Mertens, P. A., & Unshelm, J. (1996). Effects of Group and Individual Housing on the Behavior of Kennelled Dogs in Animal Shelters. Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals, 9, 40–51.
Abstract: To emphasize the effects of group- and single housing of kennelled dogs, the behavior of 211 dogs in two German animal shelters was tested and observed. After being placed, 197 of the dogs' new owners were interviewed.
Although 51% of the German animal shelters already keep dogs in groups, there is strong prejudice against group housing because of the fear of fights. This study demonstrates that this apprehension is unfounded. Ninety-one percent of the social confrontations between dogs housed together were settled by the use of behavioral rituals. Keeping dogs in groups, furthermore, leads to a significant reduction in noise emission (p<.001). Group housing fulfills the dog's need for social interaction and the need to move. Dogs that were housed in groups displayed a closer human-animal relationship (80%) than those that had been kept individually (43%). A high percentage of individually housed dogs suffered from behavioral problems (31%) and 10% developed stereotypes. The percentage of behaviorally disturbed dogs observed in group housing was 11%, and stereotyped forms of behavior did not occur. Dogs who had been kept in groups were, on average, placed within 10 days, and were returned to the animal shelter less often (9%) compared to those housed individually (25%). Dogs that were housed separately needed an average of 17 days to be placed. Even after being placed, there is a correlation between the animal shelter's type of housing and the dog's behavior. Within four weeks after picking up their pet, 88% of the owners of dogs that had been housed individually complained of problems compared to the owners of the dogs that had been kept in groups, 53% of whom were completely satisfied with the adoption.
Despite the fact that these results might be influenced by the small number of shelters examined, the study leads to the conclusion that keeping dogs in groups is a suitable alternative for dog housing in animal shelters and, for the animals' welfare, is preferable to individual housing.
|
Hedberg, Y., Dalin, A. - M., Ohagen, P., Holm, K. R., & Kindahl, H. (2005). Effect of oestrous-cycle stage on the response of mares in a novel object test and isolation test. Reprod Domest Anim, 40(5), 480–488.
Abstract: In various species, sex, hormonal treatments and oestrous-cycle stage have been shown to affect the animal's response in behavioural tests. Few such studies have been performed in the horse. The main aim of the present study was to investigate whether oestrous-cycle stage affects mares' response to a novel object test and isolation test and, in part, to study whether mares, assumed to suffer from oestrous-related behavioural problems, respond differently in these tests when compared with controls. Twelve mares were tested twice, in oestrus and dioestrus, in a crossover design. Seven behavioural and two heart rate variables were measured for the novel object test and two heart rate variables for the isolation test. Oestrous-cycle stage and whether a mare was classified as a 'problem' mare did not affect the mare's response. However, test order, i.e. the cycle stage a mare was tested in first, affected its reaction. This effect could partly be explained by significant differences between test occasions 1 and 2 in three behavioural variables and one heart rate variable (p < 0.05) in the novel object test. The mares explored the novel object more and had a higher mean heart rate in the first test. Exploring the novel object more could largely be attributed to those mares tested in dioestrus first, perhaps indicating that the mares in oestrus were less receptive to the novel object. The reason for the differences between test occasions could be an effect of learning or habituation.
|
|
Zabel, C. J., Glickman, S. E., Frank, L. G., Woodmansee, K. B., & Keppel, G. (1992). Coalition formation in a colony of prepubertal spotted hyaenas. In A. H. Harcourt, & F. B. M. de Waal (Eds.), Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and Other Animals (pp. 113–135). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
Silk, J. B. (1992). Patterns of intervention in agonistic contests among male bonnet macaques. In F.B.M. and de Waal A. H. Harcourt (Ed.), Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and Other Animals (pp. 215–232). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
Connor, R. C., Smokler, R. A., & Richards, A. F. (1992). Dolphin alliances and coalitions. In A. H. Harcourt, & F. B. M. de Waal (Eds.), Coalitions and Alliances in Humans and Other Animals (pp. 415–443). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
Noë, R. (1992). Alliance formation among male hamadryas baboons: shopping for profitable partners. In A. H. Harcourt, & F. B. M. deWaal (Eds.), Coalitions and alliances in humans and other animals (pp. 284–321). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
Tomasello, M. (1996). Do apes ape? In C. M. Heyes, & B. G. Galef (Eds.), Social learning in animals: the roots of culture (pp. 319–346). London: Academic Press.
|
