Abstract: Group turnout provides important socializing opportunities for horses, particularly those that are primarily stalled. A high percentage of equine injuries occur during group turnout, which could partly be due to the physical constraints of fencing. To investigate appropriate paddock sizes for group turnouts, horses (n = 12) from a single herd were divided into groups of 4, stalled for 24 hours, and then turned out for 1 hour into one of three differently sized pens: 342, 263, and 184 m2 per horse. Groups rotated through pens across 3 days, receiving one treatment per day. Blood was sampled for cortisol concentrations at 08:00 hours each morning, and then at 15 and 60 minutes into the turn out sessions, and 60 minutes after return to individual stalls. Groups rotated through three turnout times: 09:00, 12:00, 14:00 hours. Counts of agonistic behaviors (chasing, contact biting, and kicking) and low-level threats (pinned ears, tail swishing, bite and kick threats) were recorded. When turned out in pens that provided 342 m2 per horse, horses exhibited reduced plasma cortisol concentrations by 15 minutes after turnout and at 1 hour after return to their stalls (P < .05). Horses in pens providing 184 m2 per horse exhibited greater agonistic (P < .001) and low-level threat (P < .01) behaviors than horses in larger pens. These data provide insight into appropriate pen sizes for horses from established herds. Providing at least 342 m2 per horse may reduce the chance of injury in horses accustomed to group turnout.

Abstract: Many breeding organisations include a subjective scoring of rideability by a professional rider into their evaluation of sports horses, but the consistency and reliability of the scoring system is debateable. The aim of this study was to investigate (i) whether professional riders agree in their scoring of rideability, and (ii) whether rideability scores are affected by rein tension, horse conflict behaviour, heart rate, and salivary cortisol, and (iii) whether riders induce different levels of conflict behaviour and physiological responses in the horses. Ten professional, female riders each rode 10 dressage horses (level M German scale; n = 100 combinations) through a standardised dressage test (10 min warm-up followed by a 4-min test) and subsequently scored the horses for rideability on the official 1-10 scale (1 = poor to 10 = excellent) from the Danish Riding Federation. Rein tension, horse heart rate, saliva cortisol and conflict behaviour were measured for each rider-horse pair. The riders were inconsistent in their scoring of rideability to the individual horses, e.g. scores for one of the horses ranged from 1 to 8. There was a significant effect of rider (P = 0.003) and the frequency of conflict behaviour (undesired head movements: P < 0.001, breaking the gait: P = 0.013, and other evasive behaviour: P = 0.032) on rideability scores, i.e. the more conflict behaviour the lower the score. There was no significant effect of rein tension and the physiological measures on rideability scores. However, there was a significant effect of rider on rein tension, horses' heart rate and increases in saliva cortisol concentrations and a tendency for some types of conflict behaviour, suggesting that some riders induced more discomfort in the horses. Future studies could help shed light on which elements of riding style are particularly important for sports horse welfare. In conclusion, this study found a large variation in rideability scores assigned to ten sports horses by ten professional riders. Rideability scores were dependent on the level of horse conflict behaviour, but not rein tension and physiological measures. Further studies are needed to improve the objectivity, consistency and reliability of rideability assessment of sports horses.

Abstract: The growing recognition of animals as individuals has broader implications for farm animal welfare research. Even under highly standardized on-farm conditions, farm animals show heterogeneous but individually consistent behavioural patterns towards various stimuli, based on how they appraise these stimuli. As a result, animal welfare is likely to be highly individual as well, and studying the proximate mechanisms underlying distinct individual behaviour patterns and appraisal will improve animal welfare research. We propose to extend the framework of affective styles to bridge the gap between existing research fields on animal personality and affective states. Affective styles refer to consistent individual differences in emotional reactivity and regulation and can be predicted by baseline cerebral lateralization. Likewise, animals with consistent left or right motor biases--a proxy measure of individual patterns in cerebral lateralization--have been shown to differ in their personality, emotional reactivity, motivational tendencies or coping styles. In this paper, we present the current knowledge of the links between laterality and stable individual traits in behaviour and affect in light of hypotheses on emotional lateralization. Within our suggested framework, we make recommendations on how to investigate affective styles in non-human animals and give practical examples. This approach has the potential to promote a science of affective styles in nonhuman animals and significantly advance research on animal welfare.

Abstract: Cerebral lateralization, i.e. hemispheric asymmetries in structure and function, relates in many species to a preference to attack from their left. Lateralization increases cognitive capacity, enabling the simultaneous processing of multiple sources of information. Therefore, lateralization may constitute a component of fighting ability (Resource Holding Potential), and/or influence the efficiency of information-gathering during a contest. We hypothesized that lateralization will affect contest outcome and duration, with an advantage for more strongly lateralized individuals. In 52 dyadic contests between weight-matched pigs (Sus scrofa; n = 104; 10 wk age), the direction of orientation towards the opponent was scan sampled every 10 s. Laterality indexes (LI) were calculated for the direction and strength of lateralization. Up to 12.5% of the individuals showed significant lateralization towards either the right or left but lateralization was absent at the population level. In line with our hypothesis, animals showing strong lateralization (irrespective of direction) had a shorter contest duration than animals showing weak lateralization. Winners did not differ from losers in their strength or direction of lateralization. Overall the results suggest that cerebral lateralization may aid in conflict resolution, but does not directly contribute to fighting ability, and will be of value in the study of animal contests.