|
|
Keay, J. M., Singh, J., Gaunt, M. C., & Kaur, T. (2006). Fecal glucocorticoids and their metabolites as indicators of stress in various mammalian species: a literature review. J Zoo Wildl Med, 37(3), 234–244.
Abstract: Conservation medicine is a discipline in which researchers and conservationists study and respond to the dynamic interplay between animals, humans, and the environment. From a wildlife perspective, animal species are encountering stressors from numerous sources. With the rapidly increasing human population, a corresponding increased demand for food, fuel, and shelter; habitat destruction; and increased competition for natural resources, the health and well-being of wild animal populations is increasingly at risk of disease and endangerment. Scientific data are needed to measure the impact that human encroachment is having on wildlife. Nonbiased biometric data provide a means to measure the amount of stress being imposed on animals from humans, the environment, and other animals. The stress response in animals functions via glucocorticoid metabolism and is regulated by the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Fecal glucocorticoids, in particular, may be an extremely useful biometric test, since sample collection is noninvasive to subjects and, therefore, does not introduce other variables that may alter assay results. For this reason, many researchers and conservationists have begun to use fecal glucocorticoids as a means to measure stress in various animal species. This review article summarizes the literature on many studies in which fecal glucocorticoids and their metabolites have been used to assess stress levels in various mammalian species. Variations between studies are the main focus of this review. Collection methods, storage conditions, shipping procedures, and laboratory techniques utilized by different researchers are discussed.
|
|
|
|
Hall, C. (2007). The impact of visual perception on equine learning. Behav. Process., 76, 29–33.
|
|
|
|
McCall, C. A. (2007). Making equine learning research applicable to training procedures. Behav. Process., 76(1), 27–28.
|
|
|
|
Hothersall, B., & Nicol, C. (2007). Equine learning behaviour: accounting for ecological constraints and relationships with humans in experimental design. Behav. Process., 76(1), 45–48.
|
|
|
|
ANDREWS, R. C. (1933). The mongolian wild ass. Natural History, 33, 3–16.
|
|
|
|
Vollmerhaus, B., Roos, H., Gerhards, H., & Knospe, C. (2003). [Phylogeny, form and function of canine teeth in the horse]. Anat Histol Embryol, 32(4), 212–217.
Abstract: The canine teeth of the horse developed phylogenically from the simple, pointed, short-rooted tooth form of the leaf eating, in pairs living, Eocene horse Hyracotherium and served up to the Oligocene as a means of defense (self preservation). In the Miocene the living conditions of the Merychippus changed and they took to eating grass and adopted as a new behavior the life in a herd. The canine teeth possibly played an important role in fights for social ranking; they changed from a crown form to knife-like shape. In the Pliohippus the canine tooth usually remained in male horses and since the Pliocene, it contributed to the fights between stallions, to ensure that the offspring only came from the strongest animals (preservation of the species). Form and construction of the canine tooth are described and discussed in detail under the above mentioned phylogenic and ethologic aspects.
|
|
|
|
Bergman, T. J., Beehner, J. C., Cheney, D. L., & Seyfarth, R. M. (2003). Hierarchical classification by rank and kinship in baboons. Science, 302(5648), 1234–1236.
Abstract: Humans routinely classify others according to both their individual attributes, such as social status or wealth, and membership in higher order groups, such as families or castes. They also recognize that people's individual attributes may be influenced and regulated by their group affiliations. It is not known whether such rule-governed, hierarchical classifications are specific to humans or might also occur in nonlinguistic species. Here we show that baboons recognize that a dominance hierarchy can be subdivided into family groups. In playback experiments, baboons respond more strongly to call sequences mimicking dominance rank reversals between families than within families, indicating that they classify others simultaneously according to both individual rank and kinship. The selective pressures imposed by complex societies may therefore have favored cognitive skills that constitute an evolutionary precursor to some components of human cognition.
|
|
|
|
Heyes, C. M. (1994). Social learning in animals: categories and mechanisms. Biol. Rev., 69(2), 207–231.
Abstract: There has been relatively little research on the psychological mechanisms of social learning. This may be due, in part, to the practice of distinguishing categories of social learning in relation to ill-defined mechanisms (Davis, 1973; Galef, 1988). This practice both makes it difficult to identify empirically examples of different types of social learning, and gives the false impression that the mechanisms responsible for social learning are clearly understood. It has been proposed that social learning phenomena be subsumed within the categorization scheme currently used by investigators of asocial learning. This scheme distinguishes categories of learning according to observable conditions, namely, the type of experience that gives rise to a change in an animal (single stimulus vs. stimulus-stimulus relationship vs. response-reinforcer relationship), and the type of behaviour in which this change is detected (response evocation vs. learnability) (Rescorla, 1988). Specifically, three alignments have been proposed: (i) stimulus enhancement with single stimulus learning, (ii) observational conditioning with stimulus-stimulus learning, or Pavlovian conditioning, and (iii) observational learning with response-reinforcer learning, or instrumental conditioning. If, as the proposed alignments suggest, the conditions of social and asocial learning are the same, there is some reason to believe that the mechanisms underlying the two sets of phenomena are also the same. This is so if one makes the relatively uncontroversial assumption that phenomena which occur under similar conditions tend to be controlled by similar mechanisms. However, the proposed alignments are intended to be a set of hypotheses, rather than conclusions, about the mechanisms of social learning; as a basis for further research in which animal learning theory is applied to social learning. A concerted attempt to apply animal learning theory to social learning, to find out whether the same mechanisms are responsible for social and asocial learning, could lead both to refinements of the general theory, and to a better understanding of the mechanisms of social learning. There are precedents for these positive developments in research applying animal learning theory to food aversion learning (e.g. Domjan, 1983; Rozin & Schull, 1988) and imprinting (e.g. Bolhuis, de Vox & Kruit, 1990; Hollis, ten Cate & Bateson, 1991). Like social learning, these phenomena almost certainly play distinctive roles in the antogeny of adaptive behaviour, and they are customarily regarded as 'special kinds' of learning (Shettleworth, 1993).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
|
|
|
|
Nicol, C. J., & Pope, S. J. (1999). The effects of demonstrator social status and prior foraging success on social learning in laying hens. Anim. Behav., 57(1), 163–171.
Abstract: Opportunities for social learning within a group of animals are likely to be influenced by the social dynamics of that group. Some individuals may be more influential demonstrators than others even when there are no differences in their skill level or performance. In this study of domestic hens,Gallus gallus domesticus, differences in demonstrator salience were examined. From 24 separate flocks we selected as demonstrators a dominant cockerel, a dominant hen, a mid-ranking hen or a subordinate hen. Demonstrators were pretrained to perform an operant discrimination task to obtain food. Six observers from each flock individually watched the demonstrator perform the task for four 5-min sessions held on consecutive days. On the fifth day observers were tested individually in the operant chamber. We analysed data from 19 flocks, where there were no quantitative differences in demonstrator performance. Observer hens of relatively high social status performed more correct operant pecks than observer hens of relatively low social status. Demonstrator category also had a significant effect on subsequent observer behaviour. Hens that had observed cockerels performed very few general pecks or operant pecks. Hens that had observed dominant hens performed more operant pecks, but hens that had observed sub-ordinate hens performed more general pecks in the chamber. The results suggested either that there was an interaction between dominance and gender in demonstrator salience or that dominant hens might have been influential because of some factor imperfectly associated with their dominance status. A possible candidate was the foraging ability of the dominant hens. In a second experiment using the same protocol, we manipulated the prior foraging success of dominant hens from four additional flocks but this had no significant effect on their subsequent influence as demonstrators.
|
|
|
|
Reed, P., Skiera, F., Adams, L., & Heyes, C. M. (1996). Effects of Isolation Rearing and Mirror Exposure on Social and Asocial Discrimination Performance. Learn. Motiv., 27(2), 113–129.
Abstract: Four experiments examined the effects of rearing in isolation on rats performance on discrimination-based and social learning tasks. After demonstrating that the rearing procedures produced similar results in an open field task to those previously established (Experiment 1), rats were subjected to two discrimination tasks: an instrumental occasion setting procedure (Experiment 3) and a nonspatial win-stay/lose-shift versus win-shift/lose-stay procedure (Experiment 4). Deficits in acquisition of the necessary discriminations were noted in the rats raised in isolation, but there were no differences between isolation-reared and socially reared subjects in response acquisition per se. In Experiment 2, rats were presented with an observational learning task using the bidirectional control procedure. Socially reared rats had a tendency to imitate the behavior they had observed, but rats raised in isolation performed the opposite behavior to that observed, indicating a failure to use a conspecific as a reference point in the task. The presence of a mirror during rearing in isolation was also investigated, but was found to have little effect in attenuating the above deficits in behavior.
|
|
