Abstract: Social dominance is a multidimensional phenomenon occurring in all gregarious farm animals and finds its reflection in a dominance hierarchy. Hence, numerous studies have tried to analyse dominance relationships as well as to correlate outcoming results (mostly individual ranks) with other behavioural and/or physiological features of the animals. Although the concept of dominance, once established, has been developed continuously and several sociometric measures were cumulatively introduced, a consistent analysing approach has not been achieved, especially in farm animals. Thus, considerable inconsistencies in the used methodology may impair obtained results and interpretations. The present paper is a plea for a more standardised and complex approach when analysing dominance relationships, not only in farm animals. First, derived from a structural definition of dominance, we suggest in detail the preferably consistent use of appropriate sociometric measures at all social levels of analysis: the dyad as the starting level, the group as the highest level, and the individual as the basic level. Second, we applied this procedures in a case study to analyse social dominance in a group of dwarf goats (n=12) and pigs (n=10), respectively, to comparatively demonstrate benefits and problems of such an approach in two different farm animal species. It is concluded that the use of individual ranks is actually only reasonable when fundamental sociometric measures both at the dyadic level (e.g. percentage of dyads which have a significant asymmetric outcome) and at the group level (e.g. the strength of hierarchy) are successfully tested by statistical methods as also presented in this paper. The calculated sociometric measures deliver not only a more comprehensive “picture” of the social relationships within a group as simple ranks do, but also indicate possible reasons of differences in the behavioural development. For instance, whereas the dwarf goats maintained a quasi-linear dominance hierarchy over time with a high rate of overt agonistic behaviour, pigs after the establishment of their hierarchy showed a reduced agonistic behaviour which makes it questionable to calculate reliable sociometric measures. These species-dependent variations may be primarily caused by different kinds of the fighting behaviour in goats (i.e. ritualised, low costs) and pigs (i.e. more seriously, high costs). Overall, a more consistent and standardised approach of analysing social dominance in (farm) animals may improve the scientific value of single studies and makes it easier to compare various studies within a species and between species.

Abstract: In modern intensive husbandry systems there is an increasing tendency for animals to interact with technical equipment. If the animal-technology interface is well-designed this may improve animal welfare by offering challenges for cognitive adaptation. Here a system and its application is presented that acoustically calls individual pigs out of a group (n = 8) to a feeding station. In three different learning phases, the computer-controlled “call-feeding-station” (CFS) trained the animals to recognize a specific acoustic signal as a summons for food, using a combination of classical and operant conditioning techniques. The experimental group's stall contained four CFSs, at each of which one animal at a time was able to feed. When an animal had learned to discriminate and recognize its individual acoustic signal it had to localize the particular CFS that was calling and to enter inside it. Then, it received a portion of feed, the amount of which was adapted to the respective age of the animals. Each animal was called at several, unpredictable times each day and the computer programme ensured that the total feed supply was sufficient for each animal. In the last phase of the experiment the animals, in addition, had to press a button with an increasing fixed ratio for the delivery of feed. It was demonstrated that the pigs were able to adapt quickly to the CFSs. Although they were challenged over 12 h daily by requirements of attention, sensory localization and motor efforts to gain comparatively low amounts of feed, they performed well and reached fairly constant success rates between 90 and 95% and short delays between 14 and 16 s between a summons and the food release in the last phase of the experiment. The weight gain during the experiment was the same as in a conventionally fed control group (n = 8). We therefore conclude that CFSs present a positive challenge to the animals with no negative effects on performance but with a potentially beneficial role for welfare and against boredom. The system is also a suitable experimental platform for research on the effects of successful adaptation by rewarded cognitive processes in pigs.

Abstract: Researchers consider group size in primates to be determined by complex relationships among numerous ecological forces. Antipredator benefits and better resource defense are the primary pressures for large groups. Conversely, intragroup limited food availability, can result in greater intragroup feeding competition and individual energy expenditure in larger groups, creating energetic advantages for individuals in small groups and placing an upper limit group size. However, the extent to which food availability constrains group size remains unclear for many species, including black howlers (Alouatta pigra), which ubiquitously live in small social groups (≤10 individuals). We studied the relationship between group size and 2 key indices of feeding competition-day journey length and activity budgets in 3 groups of wild Alouatta pigra at a hurricane-damaged site in Belize, Central America. We controlled for differences in food availability between home ranges (food tree density) and compared both indicators of feeding competition directly with temporal variation in food availability for each group. Our results show no consistent association between resource availability, group size, and either index of competition, indicating that feeding competition does not limit group size at the site i.e., that larger groups can form without increased costs of feeding competition. The results support the search for other explanations, possibly social ones, for small group size in the primates, and we conclude with suggestions and evidence for such alternative explanations.

Abstract: The space allowance appropriate for sows in group housing remains scientifically undefined, since the social space requirement of a group of animals and the factors which affect this are unknown. Eight established groups of six pregnant, multiparous sows were used in a replicated Latin Square design of experiment, with 7 day periods, to compare four pen sizes providing 2.0, 2.4, 3.6 or 4.8 m2/sow. For the last 48 h of each 7 day period, a continuous video recording was made to determine general behaviour and all social interactions. Time spent rooting increased progressively with increasing space allowance, whereas time spent sitting and standing inactive were both progressively reduced. The total frequency of social interactions and aggressive behaviour both increased with decreasing space allowance. The Attack:Retreat ratio was significantly higher, and the Avoidance Index significantly lower, in the smallest pen. All body regions had the highest count of lesions after sows had been in the smallest pen, with damage levels being reduced as pen area increased. Analysis of body lesion scores, combining incidence and severity, gave the same treatment effects. In conclusion, the results indicated that a minimum space of between 2.4 and 3.6 m2/sow was necessary in the conditions of this experiment to promote good welfare. This result cannot be generalised to situations of different group size, group stability or feeding method.

Abstract: Mirror usage has been taken to indicate some degree of awareness in animals. Can pigs, Sus scrofa, obtain information from a mirror? When put in a pen with a mirror in it, young pigs made movements while apparently looking at their image. After 5 h spent with a mirror, the pigs were shown a familiar food bowl, visible in the mirror but hidden behind a solid barrier. Seven out of eight pigs found the food bowl in a mean of 23 s by going away from the mirror and around the barrier. Naïve pigs shown the same looked behind the mirror. The pigs were not locating the food bowl by odour, did not have a preference for the area where the food bowl was and did not go to that area when the food bowl was visible elsewhere. To use information from a mirror and find a food bowl, each pig must have observed features of its surroundings, remembered these and its own actions, deduced relationships among observed and remembered features and acted accordingly. This ability indicates assessment awareness in pigs. The results may have some effects on the design of housing conditions for pigs and may lead to better pig welfare.