|
|
McGreevy, P. (2004). Equine behavior. Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, 24(9), 397–398.
|
|
|
|
Cooper, J., & McGreevy, P. (2002). Stereotypic Behaviour in the Stabled Horse: Causes, Effects and Prevention without Compromising Horse Welfare. In The Welfare of Horses (pp. 99–124).
Abstract: Apparently functionless, repetitive behaviour in horses, such as weaving or crib-biting has been difficult to explain for behavioural scientists, horse owners and veterinarians alike. Traditionally activities such as these have been classed amongst the broad descriptor of undesirable stable vices and treatment has centred on prevention of the behaviours per se rather than addressing their underlying causes. In contrast, welfare scientists have described such activities as apparently abnormal stereotypics, claiming they are indicative of poor welfare, citing negative emotions such as boredom, frustration or aversion in the stable environment and even suggesting prevention of the activities alone can lead to increased distress. Our understanding of equine stereotypics has advanced significantly in recent years with epidemiological, developmental and experimental studies identifying those factors closely associated with the performance of stereotypics in stabled horses. These have allowed the development of new treatments based on removing the causal factors, improving the horses“ social and nutritional environment, re-training of horses and their owners and redirection of the activities to less harmful forms. Repetitive activities conventionally seen as undesirable responses to the stable environment, their causal basis and the effectiveness of different approaches to treatment are discussed, both in terms of reducing the behaviour and improving the horse”s quality of life.
|
|
|
|
Waran, N., McGreevy, P., & Casey, R. (2002). Training Methods and Horse Welfare. In The Welfare of Horses (pp. 151–180).
Abstract: Many aspects of horse care and handling are based upon convenience and traditional practices. Many of these methods of management and practice do not take into account the natural behaviour of horses. This is despite the belief that although domestic horses are probably more docile, stronger, faster growing and faster moving than their ancestors, they are unlikely to have lost any natural behaviours. The performance or sport horse is expected to perform a wide variety of movements and tasks, some of which are unnatural or exaggerated and most of which must be learned. The term “training” is commonly used to describe the processes whereby the human handler introduces the horse to new situations and associations. Performance horses are often required to tolerate stimuli that are innately aversive or threatening, such as having a person on their backs. They are also trained to respond to a stimulus with often unnatural or over-emphasised behaviour, such as some of the dressage movements. Effective and humane training requires an understanding of the processes underlying behaviour. These include knowledge of behaviour under natural conditions, learning processes, the influence of early experience and motivational forces. Horses differ from the other main companion animal species, namely cats and dogs, in that they are a prey species. They most commonly flee from dangerous and painful situations. Horses readily learn to avoid potentially threatening situations and if their attempts to avoid associated stimuli are prevented, they will often exhibit problem behaviours. In this chapter the history of horse training, the application of learning theory and a knowledge of equine behaviour to training, and innovative training methods are all considered.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D. (2004).
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., McLean, A. N., Warren-Smith, A. K., Waran, N., & Goodwin, D. (2005). Defining the terms and processes associated with equitation. Proceedings of the First International Equitation Science Symposium, , 10–43.
|
|
|
|
Warren-Smith, A. K., & McGreevy, P. D. (2008). Preliminary investigations into the ethological relevance of round-pen (round-yard) training of horses. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 11(3), 285–298.
Abstract: Recently, training horses within round-pens has increased in popularity. Practitioners often maintain that the responses they elicit from horses are similar to signals used with senior conspecifics. To audit the responses of horses to conspecifics, 6 mare-young-horse dyads, this study introduced them to each other in a round-pen and videoed them for 8 min. These dyads spent significantly more time farther than 10 m apart than they did less than 1 m apart (p < .001). The time they spent less than 1 m apart decreased over the 8-min test period (p = .018). Mares occupied the center of the round-pen and chased youngsters for 0.73% of the test period (p < .001). Mares made all agonistic approaches (p < .001), and youngsters (p = .018) made all investigative approaches. Head lowering and licking-and-chewing were exhibited most when the youngsters were facing away from the mares (p < .001). The frequency of head lowering increased during the test period (p = .027), whereas the frequency of licking-and-chewing did not change. The results bring into question the popular interpretation and ethological relevance of equine responses commonly described in round-pen training and show that mares did not condition young horses to remain in close proximity to them.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D. Development and Resolution of Behavioural Problems with the. In Havemeier Workshop.
Abstract: The ideals of equestrian technique combine art and science. Therefore students of equitation
encounter measurable variables such as rhythm, tempo and impulsion alongside more ethereal ones
such as outline and harmony. This mixture accounts for many of the idiosyncrasies of equestrianism
including the subjective scoring of performance in dressage tests, the elusiveness of perfection even at
an elite level of competition and the difficulty of expressing equestrian technique in empirical terms
(Roberts, 1992).
This chapter will describe and offer examples of the unwelcome behavioural responses horses
produce under saddle. Two broad sections are then proposed to allow the reader to consider
unwelcome behavioural responses caused directly by humans as distinct from those attributable more
to the horse than the rider. Ultimately the responsibility for problems in the ridden horse lies with
humans since we have undertaken the domestication and exploitation of equids. Therefore it is
accepted that the dichotomy is not absolute. The chapter closes with a
|
|
|
|
Clarke, J. V., Nicol, C. J., Jones, R., & McGreevy, P. D. (1996). Effects of observational learning on food selection in horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 50(2), 177–184.
Abstract: Fourteen riding horses of mixed age and breed were randomly allocated to observer and control treatments. An additional horse was pre-trained as a demonstrator to walk the 13.8 m length of the test arena and select one of two food buckets using colour and pattern cues. Observer horses were exposed to correct performances of the task by the trained demonstrator, for 20 trials held over 2 days. Control horses were subjected to the same handling and placement procedures as the observer horses but without exposure to the behaviour of the demonstrator. The third day for all subjects was designated as a test day. Each subject was released individually in a predetermined place in the arena, and the latency to walk the length of the test arena to the food buckets, the latency to feed, the identity of the bucket approached and the identity of the bucket selected were recorded on ten consecutive trials. During tests both food buckets contained food to minimize the possibility of individual trial and error learning. On the first trial the mean latency to approach the goal area was 18 s for observer horses, compared with 119 s for control horses (t = 2.8, d.f. = 12, P < 0.01) and the mean latency to eat was 35 s for observer horses, compared with 181 s for control horses (t = 4.86, d.f. = 11, P < 0.001). However, observer horses were no more likely to choose the demonstrated bucket than control horses on the first trial. Twelve of the 14 horses decreased their latency to approach the goal area during the series of ten trials, but there were no significant changes in the buckets selected.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., & Rogers, L. J. (2005). Motor and sensory laterality in thoroughbred horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 92(4), 337–352.
Abstract: We investigated lateralisation in horses because it is likely to be important in training and athletic performance. Thoroughbred horses (n = 106) were observed every 60 s for 2 h, when they were at pasture, and the position of the forelimbs in relation to one another was recorded. There was a population bias skewed to standing with the left forelimb advanced over the right (i.e. directional lateralisation). Using the first 50 observations, the distribution of preferences was 43 significantly left, 10 significantly right with 53 being non-significant (i.e. ambidextextrous). The strength of motor bias increased with age, suggesting maturation or an influence of training. The horses were also presented with an olfactory stimulus (stallion faeces) to score the tendency to use one nostril rather than the other. A significant preference to use the right nostril first was shown in horses under 4 years of age (n = 61) but not in older horses. Of the 157 horses tested for nostril bias, 76 had been assessed for motor bias and so were used for analysis of the relationship between laterality in the two modalities. There was no significant relationship between direction of foreleg motor bias and first nostril used, total number of inhalations or laterality index of nostril use. The absence of a correlation between laterality of nostril use and motor bias indicates that lateralisation of the equine brain occurs on at least two levels of neural organisation--sensory and motor--a finding that is consistent with other examples of lateralisation in species that have been examined in more detail.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., & Thomson, P. C. (2006). Differences in motor laterality between breeds of performance horse. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 99(1-2), 183–190.
Abstract: This study examined the relationship between motor laterality in horses bred for different types of work and therefore different temperaments. Foreleg preference during grazing was measured in three populations of domestic horse, Thoroughbreds (TB, bred to race at the gallop), Standardbreds (SB, bred for pacing) and Quarter Horses (QH, in this case bred for so-called “cutting work” which involves manoeuvring individual cattle in and out of herds). With a one-sample t-test, TBs showed strong evidence of a left preference in motor laterality (P = 0.000), as did SBs (P = 0.002) but there was no convincing evidence for laterality in QH (P = 0.117). However, the increasing trend in left preference from QH to SBs then TBs was associated with increasing differences between individual horses within a breed. The overall preference (either left or right) increased with age (P = 0.008) and the rate of increase varied with breeds. The presence of a higher proportion of left-foreleg preferent individuals in TBs and SBs compared with QH may indicate that their training or selection (or both) has an effect on motor bias.
|
|
