Abstract: Locoweed (Oxytropis sericea) is a serious poisoning problem for horses grazing on infested rangelands in the western United States. Our objectives were to determine 1) whether lithium chloride or apomorphine would condition aversions to palatable foods, and at what doses, and 2) whether horses could be averted to fresh locoweed in a pen and grazing situation. Apomorphine was not an acceptable aversive agent because at the dose required to condition an aversion (> or = 0.17 mg/kg BW), apomorphine induced unacceptable behavioral effects. Lithium chloride given via stomach tube at 190 mg/kg BW conditioned strong and persistent aversions to palatable feeds with minor signs of distress. Pen and grazing tests were conducted in Colorado to determine if horses could be averted to fresh locoweed. Pen tests indicated that most horses (5/6) were completely averted from locoweed. Treated horses ate 34 g of fresh locoweed compared to 135 g for controls (P < 0.01) during three pen tests when offered 150 g per test. One horse (T) in the treatment group ate locoweed each time it was offered in the pen, but ate no locoweed while grazing. In the grazing trial, control horses averaged 8.6% of bites of locoweed (P < 0.01) during the grazing portion of the study, whereas treated horses averaged <0.5%. One treated horse (S) accounted for all consumption; he consumed 15% of his bites as locoweed in a grazing bout on d 2 of the field study. Thereafter, he was dosed a second time with lithium chloride and ate no locoweed in the subsequent 5 d. Three of six horses required two pairings of lithium chloride with fresh locoweed to condition a complete aversion. The results of this study indicate that horses can be averted from locoweed using lithium chloride as an aversive agent, and this may provide a management tool to reduce the risk of intoxication for horses grazing locoweed-infested rangeland.

Abstract: Twelve yearlings were divided into two groups and subjected to two different training schedules: (a) 30min of training daily (the daily trained group); and (b) 30min of training for 4 days, followed by a 3-day rest (the intermittently trained group), in order to compare the effect of two training methods on the ability of the horses to learn to be driven and ridden and to respond to the handlers? cues. The length of this experimental training was 17 days. The first step of training was surcingling and proceeded to lunging, to driving from the ground, and finally to being ridden at a trot on a track. Both groups were tested four times during the experimental period when they were at the same stage of training. They were driven and then ridden at a walk by a rider on a specified course and evaluated. The time to complete the course, accuracy of traveling the course, and heart rate during the test were used as the indicators of success in training. In three out of the four tests, the daily trained group tended to move faster and with more accuracy than the intermittently trained group. It would appear that daily training without a long interruption is more effective for yearlings.

Abstract: Relatively few large-scale faecal DNA studieshave been initiated due to difficulties inamplifying low quality and quantity DNAtemplate. To improve brown bear faecal DNA PCRamplification success rates and to determinepost collection sample longevity, fivepreservation methods were evaluated: 90%ethanol, DETs buffer, silica-dried, oven-driedstored at room temperature, and oven-driedstored at -20 °C. Preservationeffectiveness was evaluated for 50 faecalsamples by PCR amplification of a mitochondrialDNA (mtDNA) locus (~146 bp) and a nuclear DNA(nDNA) locus (~200 bp) at time points of oneweek, one month, three months and six months. Preservation method and storage timesignificantly impacted mtDNA and nDNAamplification success rates. For mtDNA, allpreservation methods had >= 75% success atone week, but storage time had a significantimpact on the effectiveness of the silicapreservation method. Ethanol preserved sampleshad the highest success rates for both mtDNA(86.5%) and nDNA (84%). Nuclear DNAamplification success rates ranged from 26-88%, and storage time had a significant impacton all methods but ethanol. Preservationmethod and storage time should be importantconsiderations for researchers planningprojects utilizing faecal DNA. We recommendpreservation of faecal samples in 90% ethanolwhen feasible, although when collecting inremote field conditions or for both DNA andhormone assays a dry collection method may beadvantageous.

Abstract: Patterns of aggressive and affiliative behavior, such as counter aggression and reconciliation, are said to covary in the genus Macaca; this is referred to as the systematic variation hypothesis. These behavior patterns constitute a species dominance style. Van Schaik's [1989] socioecological model explains dominance style in macaques in terms of within- and between-group contest competition. Dominance style is also said to correlate with phylogeny in macaques. The present study was undertaken to examine phylogenetic and socioecological explanations of dominance style, as well as the systematic variation hypothesis. We collected data on counter aggression and reconciliation from a habituated group of Assamese macaques (Macaca assamensis) at the Tukeswari Temple in Assam, India. The proportion of agonistic episodes that involved counter aggression was relatively low. Counter aggression, however, occurred more often among males than among females, and it was most common when females initiated aggression against males. The conciliatory tendency for this group of Assamese macaques was 11.2%. The frequency of reconciliation was low for fights among males and for fights among females, but reconciliation was particularly rare for opposite-sexed opponents. Female social relationships were consistent with the systematic variation hypothesis, and suggest a despotic dominance style. A despotic dominance style in Assamese macaques weakens the correlation between dominance style and phylogeny in macaques, but it is not inconsistent with the socioecological model. Male-female relationships were not well explained by the despotic-egalitarian framework, and males may well have more tolerant social relationships than do females. Sex differences need to be considered when categorizing species according to dominance style.