Abstract: In contrast to horses in pastures, it is thought that free-ranging horses do not perform latrine behaviour, i.e. a behavioural pattern whereby the animals graze and defecate in separate areas. However, few studies deal with this particular subject, reporting contrasting conclusions. We hypothesize that horses free-ranging in large heterogeneous areas do not perform latrine behaviour. Thus, we believe that grazing and elimination behaviour are spatially related: where horses graze, they will also defecate. Behavioural data were collected from Konik horses, Haflinger horses, Shetland ponies and donkeys, grazing in different nature reserves (54-80 ha). Data for the different equids were analyzed separately, as well as data for mares and stallions (Konik and donkey stallions only). We investigated the proportion of the number of defecations/urinations while grazing on the total number of defecations/urinations; furthermore, we searched for the sequence of behaviours representing latrine behaviour in the strict sense. Additionally, we analyzed the correlation between grazing behaviour and eliminative behaviour on both vegetation type level and patch level. All the female equids often continued grazing while defecating. During urination, grazing ceases in the majority of instances. Cases where a mare terminated grazing in a certain vegetation type and sward height to eliminate in another vegetation type or in another sward height within the same vegetation type were rarely observed. On the vegetation type level as well as on the patch level, there was a highly significant (P<0.001) positive correlation between grazing time and number of eliminations (or eliminating time). The high values of the correlation coefficients (in case of the defecation variables r ranges between 0.553 and 0.955; in case of the urination variables r ranges between 0.370 and 0.839) illustrate that the spatial distribution of the eliminative behaviour can be explained to a high degree by the spatial distribution of the grazing behaviour. Results in the case of the stallions are preliminary, but indicate the same pattern. Horses, free-ranging in large heterogeneous areas, do not perform latrine behaviour, but defecate where they graze. Possibly, animal density is of major importance to explain this behavioural difference with horses in pastures. We suggest that also spatial vegetation heterogeneity and plant productivity of the grazed area, as well as parasite status of the grazing animals could play a role.

Abstract: Sixteen horses were used to determine if number of trials given per training session (5, 10, 15 or 20) affected learning performance in an avoidance conditioning task. The horse had to move from one side of a test pen to the other during an auditory cue presentation to avoid aversive stimulation. A pen 8 mx3.6 m, divided into two equal sections by a 13-cm diameter plastic pipe lying on the ground, was used as the test pen. Painted plywood panels were fastened to the fence in half the pen to help horses distinguish visually between the two parts. A 10-s auditory cue was used as a signal for horses to move from one side of the test pen to the other. A 20-s intertrial interval was used. Training sessions were conducted every third day. Each trial was recorded as an avoidance (the horse completed the task during auditory cue presentation and avoided aversive stimulus) or an error (the horse received aversive stimulus). After completing ten consecutive avoidances (criterion), the horse was removed from the study. Numbers of training sessions, trials, avoidances and errors until reaching criterion were recorded for each horse. Horses varied greatly within these variables with ranges of 3-18 sessions, 37-121 trials, 20-68 avoidances and 17-53 errors to criterion. No differences were detected (P>0.05) in the number of conditioning trials per training session (treatment) for the mean number of trials, avoidances or errors to criterion. Number of training sessions to criterion differed (P<0.01) among treatments, indicating that an optimum number of learning trials per training session might exist. Mean sessions to criterion for horses receiving 5, 10, 15 and 20 trials per session were 15.1+/-1.3, 5.8+/-1.1, 5.3+/-1.1 and 4.6+/-1.1, respectively. Regression analysis indicated that 16.2 trials per training session would minimize number of sessions to criterion. Although it is widely assumed that learning efficiency in horses is decreased when intense activity is concentrated into a small number of sessions, these results indicate that moderate repetition of training activities is needed for efficient learning.

Abstract: Learning performances are influenced by many factors, not only breed, age and sex, but also temperament. The purpose of this study was to understand how different temperamental dimensions affect the learning performance of horses, Equus caballus. First, we carried out a series of behavioural tests on 36 Welsh ponies aged 5-7 years to measure five temperamental dimensions: fearfulness (novel area test and surprise test), gregariousness (social isolation test), reactivity to humans (passive human test), tactile sensitivity (von Frey filament test) and activity level (evaluation of locomotor activity during all the tests). We then presented them with two learning tasks (avoidance and backwards-forwards tasks). In the avoidance task they had to learn to jump over a fence when they heard a sound associated with an aversive stimulus (puff of air). In the backwards-forwards task they had to walk forwards or move backwards in response to a tactile or vocal command to obtain a food reward. There was no correlation between performances on the two learning tasks, indicating that learning ability is task-dependent. However, correlations were found between temperamental data and learning performance (Spearman correlations). The ponies that performed the avoidance task best were the most fearful and the most active ones. For instance, the number of trials required to perform 5 consecutive correct responses (learning criterion) was correlated with the variables aimed at measuring fearfulness (way of crossing a novel area: rs = -0.41, P = 0.01 and time to start eating again after a surprise effect: rs = -0.33, P = 0.05) and activity level (frequency of trotting during all the tests: rs = -0.40, P = 0.02). The animals that performed the backwards-forwards task best were the ones that were the least fearful and the most sensitive. For instance, the learning criterion (corresponding to the number of trials taken to achieve five consecutive correct responses) was correlated with the variables aimed at measuring fearfulness (latency to put one foot on the area: rs = 0.43, P = 0.01; way of crossing a novel area: rs = 0.31, P = 0.06; and time to start eating again after a surprise effect: rs = 0.43, P = 0.009) and tactile sensitivity (response to von Frey filaments: rs = -0.44, P = 0.008). This study revealed significant links between temperament and learning abilities that are highly task-dependent.

Abstract: A previously described (Windschnurer et al., 2009) avoidance distance test was used to assess animals’ fear of humans in order to quantify the human–animal relationship (HAR). This study investigated the influence of the dominant and flightiest animals within a group on the responsiveness of animals during the avoidance distance test. Eighty-eight pregnant heifers comprised of four different genotypes were used (22 animals per genotype): Limousin × Holstein-Friesian, Limousin × Simmental, Charolais × Limousin, and Charolais × Simmental. Sixty of the 88 heifers were group housed (n = 5) into 12 pens with 3 pens per breed, while 28 heifers were singly housed (seven heifers per breed). A reactivity test was performed on days 10, 18, 25 and 30 post-housing on the singly housed heifers, and then on the group housed heifers, on the same days, to calculate a reactivity score. On days 33 and 37 flight and dominance tests, respectively, were performed to identify the flightiest and the dominant animal within each group. On day 41, an avoidance test, measuring both the avoidance distance towards a familiar and an unfamiliar human, was performed on all heifers. No difference (P > 0.05) in reactivity scores was found between the genotypes, between pens for the group housed heifers or between singly housed and group housed heifers (P = 0.28). The avoidance distance (AD) of singly (S) housed heifers towards a familiar (F) (ADSF) human was shorter (P < 0.001) than the avoidance distance of group (G) housed heifers towards an unfamiliar human (ADSU). The ADSF and ADGF were correlated with the ADSU and ADGU (R = 0.87 for singly housed heifers; R = 0.61 for group housed heifers, P < 0.001). For the singly housed heifers, no correlation was observed between reactivity score and ADSF (R = 0.36, P = 0.18), whereas the reactivity score and ADSU were correlated (R = 0.68, P = 0.004). For the group housed heifers no significant correlation was detected between the reactivity score and ADGF (R = 0.18, P = 0.22) or ADGU (R = &#8722;0.11, P = 0.39). No influence of the most dominant animal and the flightiest animals was found on the behaviour of the group in term of avoidance distance and reactivity (P > 0.05). It is concluded that the assessment of the fear of the animals towards humans using the avoidance test at the feed bunk may be useful for singly and group housed heifers and that the leaders of a group such as the flightiest animal or the dominant animal did not influence the avoidance distance test.