Abstract: Pain evaluation is a key issue for equine welfare and it is often cause of concern because it is difficult to determine its intensity and duration. This is essential when different people are looking after the animals and they need to decide when or not giving analgesics to guarantee the welfare of the subject. The most widely used technique to determine pain in horses is identifying pain related behaviors. The aim of this study was to determine inter-observer reliability of two different assessors evaluating pain related behaviors in horses undergoing castration. 8 stallions of different breed, aged between 2 and 4 years, were included in the study. All the subjects underwent routine castration (closed technique in general anesthesia). The subjects were placed in an observation box for 5 days and their behavior was recorded for 15 minutes before the surgery and 4, 8, 16, 24 and 40 hours after intervention. Two blind observers, using a given ethogram of horse pain related behaviors modified from literature (for a review Ashley, 2005), analyzed horses behavior at each interval. Descriptive statistics and K Kendall test were performed. Observers agreed significantly assessing agitation, reluctance to move, kicking the abdomen, lethargy, rolling, attention and curiosity (P<0.05), however agreement was low for head movements, stretching, flank watching, lowered head carriage, weight shifting, abnormal movement, fixed stare. Our results show that assessing pain in horses should be a cause of concern, because different pain related behaviors are difficult to identify and to have agreement between two observers. Training of care takers of horses on identification of specific behaviors is needed to standardize pain assessment. Acknowledgements: The authors wish to thank the EU VII Framework programme (FP7-KBBE-2010-4) for financing the Animal Welfare Indicators (AWIN) project and for providing funds for Emanuela Dalla Costa and Michela Minero to present this paper.

Abstract: Social observational learning is one of learning abilities expected in domestic horses (Equus caballus) because of their ecological and evolutional history. However, a few studies on this type of learning in horses failed to provide clear evidence of observational learning and/or could not distinguished it from other types of learning. We tested interspecific observational learning abilities using the spatial task and a human demonstrator. We hypothesised that 1) horses with possibility of observing a human demonstrator will complete the task in shorter time than control horses without any demonstrator, and 2) horses observing a familiar demonstrator will carry out the task in shorter time than horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator due to established positive human-horse relationship. We randomly allocated 24 riding horses of mixed age and breed to three groups per 8 and started the task either with observing a familiar demonstrator, unfamiliar demonstrator or without demonstrator (control group). Each horse was released individually at the starting point in the experimental paddock and the latency to pass the task was recorded. A horse completed the task once it walked 25 m from the starting point to the squared area (4x4 m) fenced by a tape, went into it through the entrance on the opposite side and touched the bucket with food. Eight people served as demonstrators, each for one familiar and one unfamiliar horse. Horses from groups with a demonstrator, either familiar or unfamiliar, reached the food bucket significantly faster than control horses during the first trial (mean±SE: 29.1±3.13 s with familiar, 28.9±3.13 s unfamiliar and 41.5 ± 3.13 s without demonstrator, P<0.02, GLMM, PROC MIXED, SAS). Horses did not differ in time needed to reach the fence of the squared area, but in “solving time”, i.e. time from reaching the fence of the squared area and touching the bucket (14.6±2.34, 14.3±2.34 and 27.6±2.34 s in horses with familiar, unfamiliar or without demonstrator, P<0.001). Despite our presumption, the horses observing a familiar demonstrator finished the task in comparable time as horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator (P=0.85) which indicated little effect of long lasting positive relationship between a horse and a particular human. We found, however, large individual variability in performance of individual demonstrators. Further, horses did not differ in time needed to pass the same task without a demonstrator repeated either shortly or 7 days after the first test which supported that interspecific observational learning rather than social facilitation occurred. In conclusion, horses with a human demonstrator, regardless familiar or unfamiliar, were able to solve the task in shorter time compared to control horses but they did not differ in performing repeated task if they learned it by individual or social learning process. This indicates that interspecific observational learning does occur in horses. Supported by AWIN, EU FP7 project No. 266213.

Abstract: Group housed horses at a stud farm/riding stable in Belgium were observed on 17 days between 21 February and 25 April 2008, totalling 54hr25min of detailed data. The original group consisted of 8 Irish Cob mares, 1 Warmblood mare, 1 Arabian gelding and 2 Arabian mares. The group had been established in December 2007. During the course of the study 5 horses were removed from the group and 2 foals were born. 3 highly pregnant mares were housed adjacent to the group for part of the period. Horses were regularly used for lessons. Available surface area differed with the group on pasture at the end. Continuous all occurrence sampling of 10 agonistic and 2 affiliative behaviours was carried out for all group members present. Overall the group showed a frequency of 44.75 agonistic interactions per hour and 11.25 affiliative per hour. Of those agonistic interactions 46.3% were threats while 47% were less active interactions (displacement, being avoided), leaving only 6.7% more aggressive interactions ( mainly biting, some kicking and chasing). The effect on acting agonistically was not significant for age (p=0.1591) and borderline significant for density (p=0.0627). The analysis of the frequency of affiliative interactions showed there is no significant effect of age (p=0.1865) or density (p=0.7923). Agonistic and affiliative interactions were not significantly correlated (p=0.72). Affiliative behaviour a horse received showed a borderline effect (p=0.0787) on agonistic behaviour, as did the interaction between received agonistic and affiliative interactions (p=0.0725). Received agonistic interactions had a borderline negative effect (p=0.0656) on affiliative behaviour. A dominance hierarchy was calculated based on agonistic interactions using Empirical Bayes’ estimates based on Poisson regression with random effects. Agonistic behaviour expressed to other horses was significantly effected by relative rank (p=0.0243). Overall horses tended to be 3.7 times more aggressive towards lower ranking horses compared to higher ranking horses. Affiliative behaviour shown to other horses was not significantly influenced by the rank of the social partner (p=0.7915). Some individuals did show a significant effect whereby they showed more affiliative behaviour towards lower ranking individuals. This study was a small project to look at a practical situation of riding horses being kept in group housing. The frequent changes in group composition and available surface made it possible to look at agonistic and affiliative interactions in such circumstances. This is useful as instability in group composition is often used as main reason not to keep horses in social groups. The results from this study showed a borderline effect of density on agonistic behaviour. In reality it was also influenced by practical details, like a narrow paddock with only 2 hay crates on the smallest surface. Rank in a dominance hierarchy, based on agonistic behaviour, had a significant effect on the agonistic behaviour expressed towards higher or lower ranking horses. No injuries or escalating fights were observed. This study shows it is possible to keep a group of riding horses in a social context without excessive aggression.

Abstract: The responses of eleven pairs of crib-biting and non-crib-biting horses (controls) to an arousal-inducing stimulus were studied. Video-observation of the horses revealed that crib-biting horses spent between 10.4 and 64.7% of their stabling time performing the stereotypy. During the first 2 days of an experimental period, the horses were conditioned to receive food from a special bucket. On the third day the food bucket was presented, but the horses were not allowed to feed. Arousal behaviour and crib-biting intensity as well as plasma cortisol concentration, heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) were recorded at rest, and during and after presentation of the food stimulus. The stimulus induced a significant increase of HR and arousal behaviour in crib-biters and in controls, whereas the crib-biting frequency decreased. Power spectral analysis of the HRV revealed significant differences between crib-biters and controls at rest: crib-biters had a lower vagal tone (high frequency component, HF) and a higher sympathetic tone (low frequency component, LF) than controls. The lower basal parasympathetic activity might be an indication why crib-biting horses, in contrast to the controls, showed neither a significant decrease of the HF component during presentation of the food stimulus nor an increase of the HF component after presentation. Thus, there might be differences in the tuning of the autonomous nervous system and of the stress reactivity in crib-biting and in control horses. The results suggest that the crib-biting horses are more stress sensitive and physiologically and psychologically less flexible than the control horses.

Abstract: Solving horse nutrition challenges require contributions from Psychology, Biology, Agriculture, and Veterinary Medicine because these are biological challenges of an anthropological nature. The domesticated horse has shifted from an animal of war, transportation, and farmwork, to a companion enjoyed for sport, leisure and recreation. The first realization and responsibility must lie in the fact that it is the owners and managers which are the source of many of the horses’ challenges. Nutritional challenges include: defining requirements and absorption of nutrients, improving feed efficiencies for performance, improving feeding management and eating behaviors, and preventing or treating clinical problems. These challenges can be addressed through science, horse management, and education. Many of today’s challenges in horse nutrition can be related to the equine genome and genetics. Those that can be addressed with nutritional consequences include Polysaccharide Storage Myopathy, Equine Metabolic Syndrome, Recurrent Exertional Rhabdomyolysis, Glycogen Branching Enzyme Deficiency, Hyperkalemic Periodic Paralysis, and Development Orthopedic Disorders. It is the scientific understanding of cellular processes in relation to nutrients which address the symptoms associated with these diseases. Consequently, feeding management can be changed to actually treat the disease. The most recent advances in equine nutrition implement the use of molecular and cellular based techniques to understand how nutrients are needed during times of stress, feed withdrawal and to maintain gut health. For example, the absorptive capacity and transporter gene expression and localization, are now being quantified. We are also now assessing the impact of the loss of reproductive endocrines on calcium and phosphorus homeostasis in the horse. Additionally, bioluminescent pathogenic bacteria have been utilized to view attachment rates in the gastrointestinal tract of the horse. These are merely examples of the approaches of science to these nutritional challenges. Science is of little use unless it is incorporated into improved management of horses. Every type of horse requires different management and good husbandry. In our country, 70+% of the horses are kept in small herds, on limited acreage, and used for recreation and sport. Since we have taken the horse out of its natural environment and subjected it to these roles, we now seek to determine ways to feed the horse in our environments; i.e. obesity, inconsistent exercise, confinement, surgery, competition, diseases. Private horse feed agribusinesses have aggressively positioned excellent products with claims to improve health, reproduction, performance, and even horse happiness. Owners and managers seek unbiased science upon which they ultimately make their own decisions. General challenge categories seem to be feeding geriatric horses, active performance horses, and idle horses with secondary metabolic problems. Thus, feeding recommendations include the determination of specific horse nutrient requirements, maximization of available forages, providing other nutrients, and exercise to manage horses more as horses. Private and public companies and Extension systems exist to provide online and other sources of information. As more and more people own horses as a hobby and for recreation, they share responsibility to inform themselves on how to best feed and care for their horses.