Abstract: Observation of behaviour, especially social behaviour, and experimental studies of learning and brain function give us information about the complexity of concepts that animals have. In order to learn to obtain a resource or carry out an action, domestic animals may: relate stimuli such as human words to the reward, perform sequences of actions including navigation or detours, discriminate amongst other individuals, copy the actions of other individuals, distinguish between individuals who do or do not have information, or communicate so as to cause humans or other animals to carry out actions. Some parrots, that are accustomed to humans but not domesticated, can use words to have specific meanings. In some cases, stimuli, individuals or actions are remembered for days, weeks or years. Events likely to occur in the future may be predicted and changes over time taken into account. Scientific evidence for the needs of animals depends, in part, on studies assessing motivational strength whose methodology depends on the cognitive ability of the animals. Recognition and learning may be associated with changes in physiology, behaviour and positive or negative feelings. Learning and other complex behaviour can result in affect and affect can alter cognition. The demonstration of cognitive bias gives indications about affect and welfare but should be interpreted in the light of other information. All of the information mentioned so far helps to provide evidence about sentience and the level of awareness. The term sentience implies a range of abilities, not just the capacity to have some feelings. The reluctance of scientists to attribute complex abilities and feelings to non-humans has slowed the development of this area of science. Most people consider that they have obligations to some animals. However, they might protect animals because they consider that an animal has an intrinsic value, or because of their concern for its welfare. In social species, there has been selection promoting moral systems that might result in behaviours such as attempts to avoid harm to others, collaboration and other altruistic behaviour. An evaluation of such behaviour may provide one of the criteria for decisions about whether or not to protect animals of a particular species. Other criteria may be: whether or not the animal is known as an individual, similarity to humans, level of awareness, extent of feelings, being large, being rare, being useful or having aesthetic quality for humans. Cognitive ability should also be considered when designing methods of enriching the environments of captive animals.

Abstract: Our previous study suggested that fenofibrate affects obesity and lipid metabolism in a sexually dimorphic manner in part through the differential activation of hepatic peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARalpha) in male and female C57BL/6J mice. To determine whether fenofibrate reduces body weight gain and adiposity in female sham-operated (Sham) and ovariectomized (OVX) C57BL/6J mice, the effects of fenofibrate on not only body weight, white adipose tissue (WAT) mass, and food intake, but also the expression of both leptin and PPARalpha target genes were measured. Compared to their respective low-fat diet-fed controls, both Sham and OVX mice exhibited increases in body weight and WAT mass when fed a high-fat diet. Fenofibrate treatment decreased body weight gain and WAT mass in OVX, but not in Sham mice. Furthermore, fenofibrate increased the mRNA levels of PPARalpha target genes encoding peroxisomal enzymes involved in fatty acid beta-oxidation, and reduced apolipoprotein C-III (apo C-III) mRNA, all of which were expressed at higher levels in OVX compared to Sham mice. However, leptin mRNA levels were found to positively correlate with WAT mass, and food intake was not changed in either OVX or Sham mice following fenofibrate treatment. These results suggest that fenofibrate differentially regulates body weight and adiposity due in part to differences in PPARalpha activation, but not to differences in leptin production, between female OVX and Sham mice.

Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate behavioral compliance of horses and ponies with simulated intranasal vaccination and assess development of generalized aversion to veterinary manipulations. DESIGN: Clinical trial. ANIMALS: 28 light horse mares, 3 pony geldings, 2 light horse stallions, and 3 pony stallions that had a history of compliance with veterinary procedures. PROCEDURE: Behavioral compliance with 2 intranasal vaccine applicators was assessed. Compliance with standard physical examination procedures was assessed before and after a single experience with either of the applicators or a control manipulation to evaluate development of generalized aversion to veterinary manipulation. RESULTS: In all 30 horses, simulated intranasal vaccination or the control manipulation could be performed without problematic avoidance behavior, and simulated intranasal vaccination did not have any significant effect on duration of or compliance with a standardized physical examination that included manipulation of the ears, nose, and mouth. Results were similar for the 2 intranasal vaccine applicators, and no difference in compliance was seen between horses in which warm versus cold applicators were used. For 3 of the 6 ponies, substantial avoidance behavior was observed in association with simulated intranasal vaccination, and compliance with physical examination procedures decreased after simulated intranasal vaccination. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Although some compliance problems were seen with ponies, neither problems with compliance with simulated intranasal vaccination nor adverse effects on subsequent physical examination were identified in any of the horses. Further study is needed to understand factors involved in practitioner reports of aversion developing in association with intranasal vaccination.