Abstract: Intraspecific interactions between individuals or groups of individuals of the same species are an important component of population dynamics. Interactions can be static, such as spatial overlap, or dynamic based on the interactions of movements, and can be mediated through communication, such as the deployment of scent marks. Interactions and their behavioural outcomes can be difficult to determine, especially for species that live at low densities. With the use of GPS collars we quantify both static and dynamic interactions between male cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and the behavioural outcomes. The 99% home-ranges of males overlapped significantly while there was little overlap of the 50% home-ranges. Despite this overlap, male cheetahs rarely came into close proximity of one another, possibly because presence was communicated through frequent visits to marking posts. The minimum distance between individuals in a dyad ranged from 89m to 196m but the average proximity between individuals ranged from 17,145 ± 6,865m to 26,367 ± 11,288m. Possible interactions took place more frequently at night than by day and occurred mostly in the 50% home-range of one individual of a dyad or where cores of both individuals overlapped. After a possible encounter male cheetahs stayed in close proximity to each other for up to 6 hours, which could be the result of a territory defence strategy or the presence of a receptive female. We believe that one of the encounters between a singleton and a 5-male coalition resulted in the death of the singleton. Our results give new insights into cheetah interactions, which could help our understanding of ecological processes such as disease transmission.

Abstract: Background The increased use of meta-analysis in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions has highlighted several types of bias that can arise during the completion of a randomised controlled trial. Study publication bias has been recognised as a potential threat to the validity of meta-analysis and can make the readily available evidence unreliable for decision making. Until recently, outcome reporting bias has received less attention. Methodology/Principal Findings We review and summarise the evidence from a series of cohort studies that have assessed study publication bias and outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials. Sixteen studies were eligible of which only two followed the cohort all the way through from protocol approval to information regarding publication of outcomes. Eleven of the studies investigated study publication bias and five investigated outcome reporting bias. Three studies have found that statistically significant outcomes had a higher odds of being fully reported compared to non-significant outcomes (range of odds ratios: 2.2 to 4.7). In comparing trial publications to protocols, we found that 40-62% of studies had at least one primary outcome that was changed, introduced, or omitted. We decided not to undertake meta-analysis due to the differences between studies. Conclusions Recent work provides direct empirical evidence for the existence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. There is strong evidence of an association between significant results and publication; studies that report positive or significant results are more likely to be published and outcomes that are statistically significant have higher odds of being fully reported. Publications have been found to be inconsistent with their protocols. Researchers need to be aware of the problems of both types of bias and efforts should be concentrated on improving the reporting of trials.

Abstract: Wolves returned to Germany in 2000, leading to fear in German horse owners that their horses could be in danger of wolf attacks or panic-like escapes from pastures when sighting wolves. However, reports from southern European countries indicate that wolf predation on horses diminishes with increasing presence of wildlife. Therefore, we conducted a long-term, filed observation between January 2015 and July 2022 on 13 non breeding riding horses, mares and geldings, kept permanently on two pastures within the range of wildlife and a stable wolf pack with annual offspring. Wildlife cameras at the fences of the pastures made 984 times recordings of wolves and 3151 times recordings of wildlife in and around the pastures. Between 1 January 2022 and 23 March 2022 we observed two stable horse groups. Pasture 1 was grazed by five horses of mixed breed, four mares and one gelding, with the median age of 8 years (min. = 6y, max. = 29y). Pasture 2 was grazed by eight heavy warmbloods and draught horses, three mares and five geldings, with the median age of 16 years (min. = 13y, max. = 22y). During this period no wolf was recorded at pasture 2, but wild boar several times, whereas at pasture 1, wolves were recorded 89 times, and for the wildlife mostly hare. Wolves may have avoided pasture 2 because of the presence of wild boar or because the large group of older, heavy breed horses may have formed a stable, protective group. The latter needs to be confirmed in a follow-up field observation, which records anti-predator behavior and welfare indicators in horses. In conclusion, wolves did not attack the mature horses on pastures with plenty of wildlife and the horses did not respond to the presence of wolves with visible signs of reduced welfare or panic. This indicates that wolves may prefer to prey on easily accessible wildlife around and at horse pastures and that Central European horses become accustom to the presence of non-hunting wolves.

Abstract: The effects of hyperflexion on the welfare of dressage horses have been debated. This study aimed to investigate acute stress responses of dressage horses ridden in three different Head-and-Neck-positions (HNPs). Fifteen dressage horses were ridden by their usual rider in a standardised 10-min dressage programme in either the competition frame (CF), hyperflexion (“Low-Deep-and-Round”; LDR) or a looser frame (LF) in a balanced order on three separate test days. Heart rate (HR), heart rate variability parameters (HRV), behaviour and rein tension were recorded during the test. Salivary cortisol concentrations were measured 60min before and 0, 5, 15 and 30min after the test. Rein tension was significantly lower in LF and did not differ between CF and LDR; however approx. 15% of recordings in CF and LDR were above the sensor detection limit of 5kg. The horses had significantly higher cortisol concentrations directly after LDR compared to LF. In addition, the horses showed more distinctive head movements, including head waving, during LDR. There were no significant treatment effects on HR and HRV. In conclusion, the results indicate that LDR may be more stressful to these horses during riding.

Abstract: Animal management often involves procedures that, while unlikely to cause physical pain, still cause aversive responses. The domestic horse (Equus caballus) regularly has excessive hair clipped off to facilitate its use as a riding/driving animal and this procedure causes adverse behavioral responses in some animals. The aim of this study was to compare behavioral and physiological measures to assess the aversive effect of this procedure. Ten horses were selected on the basis of being either compliant (C: n=5) or non-compliant (NC: n=5) during this procedure. The horses were subjected to a sham clipping procedure (SC: where the blades had been removed from the clippers) for a period of ten minutes. Measures were taken pre, during and post SC (-10min to +30min) and mean values calculated for ALL horses and for C and NC separately. Behavioral activity was scored (scale 1-5) by twenty students from video footage in (phase/group-blind scoring). Heart rate (HR), salivary cortisol and eye temperature were monitored throughout the procedure. The NC horses were found to be significantly more behaviorally active/less relaxed throughout the trial than C horses (p<0.05) with the greatest difference occurring during the SC procedure (p<0.01). NC horses were more active/less relaxed during, compared with pre or post SC (p<0.05), but showed no behavioral difference pre and post SC. HR of the NC horses was higher than that of the C horses throughout the trial but only significantly so after 10min of SC (p<0.01). ALL horses showed a significant increase in HR between +5 and +10min into the procedure (p<0.05). There was a significant increase in salivary cortisol concentration in ALL horses post procedure (p<0.01) with levels peaking at 20minute post SC. No significant differences in salivary cortisol concentration between C and NC were found at any stage of the trial. Eye temperature increased significantly in ALL horses during SC, peaking at +10min into the procedure (p<0.05) and then decreased substantially when SC had ceased (p<0.01). Although no significant differences were found between C and NC per se, there was a significant interaction between group and phase of trial (p<0.05) with the NC group showing a greater decrease in eye temperature post SC. There was a significant positive correlation between changes in salivary cortisol concentration and eye temperature (p<0.01) but no correlation between any of the other measures. Although the behavioral response of C and NC to this procedure was significantly different the physiological responses indicated that ALL horses found the procedure aversive. Eye temperature could be used as an objective and immediate measure of how an animal is responding to a specific situation in order to evaluate management procedures and adapt them where appropriate to reduce the negative impact on animal health and welfare.