Abstract: The study of animal behavior has been around for many years, but it is divided into several fields which often do not communicate well. These fields of study include (but are not limited to) comparative psychology, ethology, behavioral ecology, and sociobiology. Comparative psychology is more isolated than the other three fields, which share a common biological/evolutionary background. This paper gives a brief background of the four main fields of animal behavior research, along with a list of sources, both specialized and interdisciplinary.

Abstract: The benefits to humans of equine-assisted therapy (EAT) have been well-researched, however few studies have analyzed the effects on the horse. Understanding how differing mental states of humans affect the behaviour and response of the horse can assist in providing optimal outcomes for both horse and human. Four humans clinically diagnosed and under care of a psychotherapist for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) were matched physically to four neurotypical control humans and individually subjected to each of 17 therapy horses loose in a round pen. A professional acting coach instructed the control humans in replicating the physical movements of their paired PTSD individual. Both horses and humans were equipped with a heart rate (HR) monitor recording HR every 5secs. Saliva samples were collected from each horse 30 min before and 30 min after each trial to analyze cortisol concentrations. Each trial consisted of 5 min of baseline observation of the horse alone in the round pen after which the human entered the round pen for 2 min, followed by an additional 5 min of the horse alone. Behavioural observations indicative of stress in the horse (gait, head height, ear orientation, body orientation, distance from the human, latency of approach to the human, vocalizations, and chewing) were retrospectively collected from video recordings of each trial and analyzed using a repeated measures GLIMMIX with Tukey's multiple comparisons for differences between treatments and time periods. Horses moved slower (p < 0.0001), carried their head lower (p < 0.0001), vocalized less (p < 0.0001), and chewed less (p < 0.0001) when any human was present with them in the round pen. Horse HR increased in the presence of the PTSD humans, even after the PTSD human left the pen (p < 0.0001). Since two of the PTSD/control human pairs were experienced with horses and two were not, a post-hoc analysis showed that horses approached quicker (p < 0.016) and stood closer (p < 0.0082) to humans who were experienced with horses. Horse HR was lower when with inexperienced humans (p < 0.0001) whereas inexperienced human HR was higher (p < 0.0001). Horse salivary cortisol did not differ between exposure to PTSD and control humans (p > 0.32). Overall, behavioural and physiological responses of horses to humans are more pronounced based on human experience with horses than whether the human is diagnosed with a mental disorder. This may be a reflection of a directness of movement associated with humans who are experienced with horses that makes the horse more attentive. It appears that horses respond more to physical cues from the human rather than emotional cues. This knowledge is important in tailoring therapy programs and justifying horse responses when interacting with a patient in a therapy setting.

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.

Abstract: The aim of this study was to test the existence of a “reactivity-to-humans” trait which is stable over time and across situations. For this purpose, four test situations were repeated on the same animals at 8 months, 1.5 years (N = 110 horses) and 2.5 years of age (N = 54 horses). These situations involved a “familiar passive human test” during which a familiar person stayed motionless in the test pen, a “familiar active human test” and an “unfamiliar active human test” during which a familiar or unfamiliar person attempted to touch the horse, and a “halter-fitting and heart-rate measurement test”, during which the horse was haltered and equipped with a surcingle and then had its heart-rate measured. Many behavioural variables were recorded during the tests, and correlations between ages and variables measured during other situations were investigated. When correlations were found, we concluded that the variables corresponded to temperament traits which are stable over time and across situations. The horses tested were divided into four groups according to breed (Anglo-Arab and Welsh) and year of birth (2001 and 2002). Data for each group were analysed separately with Spearman rank correlations. Regarding stability over time, there was a strong correlation between ages in the frequency of licking/nibbling the passive human, the time taken by a familiar or unfamiliar person to touch the horse, and the time taken to fit a halter (e.g. the time taken to touch the horse's muzzle was significantly correlated between ages in 7 out of the 8 possible cases: 0.40 <= R <= 0.67). Regarding stability across situations, results indicate that the more frequently a horse sniffed, licked or nibbled a passive human, the easier it was for either a familiar or unfamiliar active human to touch and halter it. Moreover, a horse which could be touched easily by a familiar human could also be touched and haltered easily by an unfamiliar human. These behaviours, which are linked directly to humans, therefore indicate good stability over time and across situations. In conclusion, this stability suggests the existence of a “reactivity-to-humans” temperament trait, whether the human is passive or active, familiar or unfamiliar. When the animals do not have frequent contact with humans, this reactivity is stable over time and can be measured as early as 8 months of age using the behavioural variables cited above.

Abstract: In the process of domestication, dogs (Canis familiaris) and cats (Felis catus) have undergone thousands of years of genetic changes that have adapted them to the human environment. Both species have acquired a global distribution and it has become quite common to find homes with the two living side by side. Nevertheless, there is widespread belief that interspecific communication between dogs and cats is problematic, stemming from their separate evolutionary development and different social structures. Consequently, many people considering possible adoption of both species are concerned about their ability to get along. Interrelationships of dogs and cats living together were studied here in an attempt to determine the main factors influencing the type of relationship likely to develop between the two species. Two approaches were used: (1) a questionnaire completed by owners of both dog(s) and cat(s), which provided a broad database of the animals' behaviors; and (2) observations carried out in participants' homes on their dog-cat interactions. Two separate ethograms for dogs and cats served for analyses of their body language. The findings revealed the following: Both species showed a similar ability to establish a relatively amicable relationship with the other species; the animals' gender had little influence on the nature of their interrelationship; and adoption of the cat prior to the dog appears to conduce to establishing an amicable relationship, as does their first encounter taking place at an early age (up to 6 months of age in cats and up to 1 year in dogs). The findings also suggest that the majority of these dogs and cats understood the particular body language displayed by one animal that has an opposite meaning for the other species; and that the earlier the age of first encounter between the two, the better this understanding. It can be concluded that exposure of both species at an early age to the presence of the other facilitates the learning of each other's body language, and the consequent establishment of an amicable relationship. A better understanding of the various factors that contribute to determining the two species' relationship should not only improve the quality of life of these pets, but also reassure and encourage more people to adopt both cat and dog.