Abstract: Abstract  This study aimed to determine whether horses have a kind of memory of humans (based on previous interactions), leading to a general significance of humans revealed by their reactions to humans in subsequent interactions. Subjects were 59 adult horses used to interact daily with humans. Three types of behavioural tests involving an unknown experimenter evaluated three possibly different memorized types of human–animal interactions (not work-related, using work-related objects, unfamiliar working task). We also performed standardized observations of routine interactions between each horse and its familiar handler (caretaker). To get a broad overview of the horses’ reactions to humans, we recorded both investigative and aggressive behaviours during the tests, representing respectively a “positive� and a “negative� memory of the relationship. Whereas correlations between tests revealed a general perception of humans as either positive or negative, unusual tests, i.e. that are not usually performed, elicited more positive reactions. Moreover, some horses reacted positively to a motionless person in their box, but negatively when this same person approached them, for example for halter fitting. Overall, aggressive reactions were more reliable indicators of the relationship than positive reactions, both between tests and between familiar and unfamiliar humans. Our results also show generalization of the perception of humans. These results support our hypothesis that perception of humans by horses may be based on experience, i.e. repeated interactions. Altogether, our results support the hypothesis that horses can form a memory of humans that impacts their reactions in subsequent interactions.

Abstract: Male ungulates engage in intense competition for access to females during the breeding season. Although fights are generally dyadic level encounters, they are on occasion disrupted by the intervention of third-party males. We investigated these third-party interventions using predictions derived from Dugatkin's model (Dugatkin 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B, 265, 433-437) of intervention behaviour. The model argues that when an individual successfully defeats an opponent there is an increase in the probability of winning a subsequent contest: a winner effect. Third-party intervention behaviour is predicted to occur as it serves to prevent either member of a competing dyad from successfully defeating his opponent, achieving a winner effect and subsequently becoming a threat to the intervener. Consistent with model predictions, our results show that intervening males held significantly higher rank than males that did not intervene and were also more likely to be dominant to both of the competing males. Intervening males did not selectively target competitors based on rank, nor did they target males based on overall dyadic rates of aggression between the intervener and competing males. Furthermore, interveners were more likely to have won their interaction immediately prior to intervention and were also likely to win their interaction subsequent to intervention when compared with contest success of the two competing males. Our results are consistent with predictions that support a winner effect for intervention behaviour in fallow deer fights.

Abstract: Although homeotherms likely experience costs of both predation risk and thermoregulation while foraging, it is unclear how foragers contend with these costs. We used foraging trays placed in sheltered microsites to determine whether temperature, a direct cue of predator presence (predator urine) and an indirect cue of predation risk (cloudy nights) affect foraging of white-footed mice, Peromyscus leucopus, in winter. Mice were presented with urine from bobcats, Lynx rufus, red foxes, Vulpes vulpes, and coyotes, Canis latrans, an herbivore (whitetailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus), and a water control. To measure rodent foraging, we used seeds of millet mixed with sand to quantify giving-up densities (the number of seeds left in each foraging tray). Giving-up density was not affected by predator urine. Rather, rodent foraging was affected by an interaction of temperature and weather. On overcast nights, when predation risk was likely lower, mice foraged more when soil temperature was higher, presumably reducing thermoregulatory costs. On clear nights, foraging was low regardless of soil temperature, presumably because foraging was more risky. These results suggest that mice consider thermoregulatory costs and predation risk when making foraging decisions, and that the indirect cue afforded by weather, rather than the direct cue of predator urine, is among the cues used to make foraging decisions. Moreover, these results suggest that sensitivity to a particular cue is likely to be context-dependent.

Abstract: Abstract  The study raises the question of whether guide dogs and pet dogs are expected to differ in response to cues of referential communication given by their owners; especially since guide dogs grow up among sighted humans, and while living with their blind owners, they still have interactions with several sighted people. Guide dogs and pet dogs were required to respond to point, point and gaze, gaze and control cues of referential communication given by their owners. Results indicate that the two groups of dogs do not differ from each other, revealing that the visual status of the owner is not a factor in the use of cues of referential communication. Both groups of dogs have higher frequencies of performance and faster latencies for the point and the point and gaze cues as compared to gaze cue only. However, responses to control cues are below chance performance for the guide dogs, whereas the pet dogs perform at chance. The below chance performance of the guide dogs may be explained by a tendency among them to go and stand by the owner. The study indicates that both groups of dogs respond similarly in normal daily dyadic interaction with their owners and the lower comprehension of the human gaze may be a less salient cue among dogs in comparison to the pointing gesture.

Abstract: To keep social cohesiveness, group-living animals have to reach consensus decisions through recruitment processes. This implies that decision-making depends on the behaviours and social relationships of several group members at different stages of movements. We tested these assumptions in a group of fifteen 18-mo-old Charolais heifers (Bos taurus) at pasture, in which two observers continuously videotaped social interactions and group departures after resting periods. These departures were preceded by a phase of preparation characterized by an increase in activity. The number of heifers participating to a movement increased with the number of group members oriented in the direction of the movement before departure. The first moving animal also recruited a higher number of mates when it had a greater number of close neighbours, the first individuals to follow being mainly its preferential partners. Coercive interactions such as pressing behaviours were observed within the 5 min preceding or following departure. After departure, the numbers of walks and restarts of the first two movers were still operative in recruiting others. The frequency of pauses of the first mover was significantly higher when it was not followed, meaning that it adjusted its behaviour to that of other group members. Decision-making was distributed among group members, with any individual being liable to move first. The behaviour of cows and their spatial distribution before departure, at departure and after departure significantly affected the number of participants in the movement, demonstrating that decision-making was time-distributed in the studied cattle group.