|
|
Graf, P., König von Borstel, U., & Gauly, M. (2013). Importance of personality traits in horses to breeders and riders. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 8(5), 316–325.
Abstract: Abstract Especially in horses, personality traits play an important role because horses' behavior influences their quality as a riding partner. In contrast to that, no objective assessment of horses' personality traits is available at present. Although initial efforts are made in this field, a successful implementation of behavior tests into horse performance tests depends on the acceptance of the riders and breeders. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to assess the importance of personality traits to breeders and riders as well as the degree of riders' acceptance of a temperament test as a more objective means of assessing equine personality traits. Using a web-based survey consisting of a 41-item questionnaire, a total of 1087 competition riders (49.3%), breeders (39.0%), leisure riders (37.9%), and professional riders (8.6%) of 13 countries were recruited to participate in the survey. When asked to split 1000 Euro among the different traits listed in the breeding goal, respondents clearly assigned more weight to the personality-related character and temperament traits (least squares mean ± standard error; P < 0.005: €228.7 ± 17.6) and willingness to work (€123.0 ± 9.6) compared with performance traits, such as the quality of trot (€77.7 ± 6.9) or show jumping (€68.0 ± 12.3). Nevertheless, expected differences in relative weighting of traits between the different groups of riders were confirmed (e.g., character and temperament: €209.3 ± 6.1 [leisure riders] vs. €149.7 ± 5.4 [competition riders], P < 0.0001). When asking why personality traits are so important, the simplification of daily work with the horses (47.9%) and relationship between horse and human (44.9%) as well as a more comfortable and safer handling (31.5%) were most commonly listed. As much as 45.6% of all participants see quality problems with the current assessment and suggested the evaluation of all breeding animals (30.1%), followed by a better standardization of assessment procedures (25.5%) and a move to more objective criteria such as the introduction of a temperament test (20.3%) for solving the problems. The present survey revealed that behavior traits are very important to all groups of riders and breeders, although there are diverse opinions about it. According to the participants, there is a need for and a high potential in the move toward more objective assessment methods of horses' personality traits, and participants would support a restructuring of the current assessment.
|
|
|
|
Yeon, S. C. (2012). Acoustic communication in the domestic horse (Equus caballus). Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 7(3), 179–185.
Abstract: Equine vocalization and acoustic sounds can communicate a horse’s emotional state, physiological state, and situation to other individuals, including other horses and humans. These vocalizations and acoustic sounds can be divided into several types. The whinny, nicker, squeal, blow, snore, snort, roar, and groan are typical types of horse vocalizations and acoustic sounds. The sound localization thresholds of horses are markedly poorer than those of other large mammals, such as humans and elephants. The audiogram of horse has shown their best sensitivity and hearing range in which it perceives sound. Laryngeal diseases, such as laryngeal hemiplegia, dorsal displacement of the soft palate, and alar fold paralysis, can cause laryngeal sounds in the upper airway. The analyses of horses’ vocalizations and laryngeal sounds that are reviewed in this article were conducted with computer-aided analysis programs using spectrograms and spectra that evaluate several parameters, including amplitude, fundamental frequency, duration, and formants. Laryngeal sound analysis could be a useful method for diagnosing upper airway diseases. This article presents a review of the literature describing scientific analyses of horse vocalizations and acoustic sounds to elucidate equine acoustic communications and aid in the development of horse-human bonds.
|
|
|
|
Tomkins, L. M., Williams, K. A., Thomson, P. C., & McGreevy, P. D. (2010). Sensory Jump Test as a measure of sensory (visual) lateralization in dogs (Canis familiaris). Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 5(5), 256–267.
Abstract: Sensory lateralization in dogs (n = 74) was investigated in this study using our innovation, the Sensory Jump Test. This required the modification of head halters to create three different ocular treatments (binocular, right, and left monocular vision) for eye preference assessment in a jumping task. Ten jumps were recorded as a jump set for each treatment. Measurements recorded included (i) launch and landing paws, (ii) type of jump, (iii) approach distance, (iv) clearance height of the forepaw, hindpaw, and the lowest part of the body to clear the jump, and (v) whether the jump was successful. Factors significantly associated with these jump outcomes included ocular treatment, jump set number, and replication number. Most notably, in the first jump set, findings indicated a left hemispheric dominance for the initial navigation of the Sensory Jump Test, as left monocular vision (LMV) compromised of jumping more than right monocular (RMV) and binocular vision, with a significantly reduced approach distance and forepaw clearance observed in dogs with LMV. However, by the third jump set, dogs undergoing LMV launched from a greater approach distance and with a higher clearance height, corresponding to an increase in success rate of the jump, in comparison with RMV and binocular vision dogs. A marginally non-significant RMV bias was observed for eye preference based on the laterality indices for approach distance (P = 0.060) and lowest body part clearance height (P = 0.067). A comparison between eye preference and launching or landing paws showed no association between these measures of sensory and motor laterality. To our knowledge, this is the first study to report on sensory lateralization in the dog, and furthermore, to compare both motor and sensory laterality in dogs.
|
|
|
|
Hartmann, E., Keeling, L. J., & Rundgren, M. (2011). Comparison of 3 methods for mixing unfamiliar horses (Equus caballus). J Vet Behav Clin Appl Res, 6(1), 39–49.
Abstract: Horses are likely to exhibit aggression when meeting for the first time. Therefore, this study compared 3 methods for mixing horses to evaluate their effectiveness in reducing aggressive interactions: (1) mixing pairs of horses in a paddock (P, 10 minutes, 15 tests), (2) introducing 1 unfamiliar horse to a pair of familiar, resident horses in a paddock (PP, 10 minutes, 15 tests), (3) allowing limited physical contact between pairs of horses for a short period of pre-exposure in neighboring boxes (B, 5 minutes, 16 tests) before mixing them in a paddock (BP, 10 minutes 16 tests). A total of 16 Swedish Standardbred mares, aged 6-18 years (mean age ± SD: 11 ± 4.4), were included in the study. Half of the horses were familiar with each other (resident horses, n = 8), whereas the other half were bought in from a variety of sources (unfamiliar horses, n = 8). Social interactions, consisting of behaviors from the sender, the receiver, and the subsequent sender's response, were recorded continuously as frequencies. There were no differences in the frequencies of aggressive behaviors between the 3 mixing methods, including those aggressive behaviors in which physical contact had been attempted (kick, strike). Although resident horses were overall more aggressive (median number of aggressive behaviors per horse, 62; Q1, 36; Q3, 68.5) than unfamiliar horses (median per horse, 4; Q1, 2; Q3, 12.5) during all tests (U = 97, P = 0.003), none of the 62 tests needed to be terminated. Unfamiliar horses did not receive more aggression from resident horses in PP (mean per test ± SD: 5.1 ± 3.1) than in P (mean per test ± SD: 6.4 ± 4.9) (t = 0.63, P = 0.544). However, the behavior “attack” was more frequent in PP (median per test, 2; Q1, 0; Q3, 5) than in P (median per test, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (U = 282, P = 0.042), and “flee” was more frequent in PP (median per test, 6; Q1, 4; Q3, 8) than in P (median per test, 1; Q1, 0; Q3, 6) (U = 290, P = 0.018). Pre-exposure in boxes did not reduce aggression in BP (median per test, 7; Q1, 4.3; Q3, 11.8) as compared with P (median per test, 6; Q1, 2; Q3, 16) (U = 264, P = 0.767), but during pre-exposure in B tests, horses exchanged more nonaggressive (median per test, 2; Q1, 0.3; Q3, 4) than aggressive (median frequency of aggressive behavior, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (W = 71, P = 0.013) and mixed interactions (median per test, 0; Q1, 0; Q3, 1) (W = 92, P = 0.016) through the opening. Results suggest mixing an unfamiliar horse with 2 resident horses at the same time instead of one by one may be preferable. In this way, the total aggression received by the unfamiliar horse will potentially be less, even though aggressive interactions may be more intense.
|
|
|
|
Baragli, P., Mariti, C., Petri, L., De Giorgio, F., & Sighieri, C. (2011). Does attention make the difference? Horses' response to human stimulus after 2 different training strategies. J Vet Behav Clin Appl Res, 6(1), 31–38.
Abstract: We hypothesized that in an open environment, horses cope with a series of challenges in
their interactions with human beings. If the horse is not physically constrained and is free to move
in a small enclosure, it has additional options regarding its behavioral response to the trainer. The
aim of our study was to evaluate the influence of 2 different training strategies on the horse’s behavioral
response to human stimuli. In all, 12 female ponies were randomly divided into the following 2
groups: group A, wherein horses were trained in a small enclosure (where indicators of the level of
attention and behavioral response were used to modulate the training pace and the horse’s control over
its response to the stimuli provided by the trainer) and group B, wherein horses were trained in a closed
environment (in which the trainer’s actions left no room for any behavioral response except for the one
that was requested). Horses’ behavior toward the human subject and their heart rate during 2 standardized
behavioral tests were used to compare the responses of the 2 groups. Results indicated that the
horses in group A appeared to associate human actions with a positive experience, as highlighted by
the greater degree of explorative behavior toward human beings shown by these horses during the tests.
The experience of the horses during training may have resulted in different evaluations of the person, as
a consequence of the human’s actions during training; therefore, it seems that horses evaluate human
beings on daily relationship experiences.
|
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., & McLean, A. N. (2007). Roles of learning theory and ethology in equitation. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 2(4), 108–118.
Abstract: By definition, ethology is primarily the scientific study of animal behavior, especially as it occurs in a natural environment; applied ethology being the study of animal behavior in the human domain. The terms equine ethology and ethological training are becoming commonplace in the equestrian domain, yet they seem to be used with a conspicuous lack of clarity and with no mention of learning theory. Most of what we do to train horses runs counter to their innate preferences. This article summarizes the ethological challenges encountered by working horses and considers the merits and limitations of ethological solutions. It also questions the use of terms such as “alpha” and “leader” and examines aspects of learning theory, equine cognition, and ethology as applied to horse training and clinical behavior modification. We propose 7 training principles that optimally account for the horse's ethological and learning abilities and maintain maximal responsivity in the trained horse. These principles can be summarized as: (1) use learning theory appropriately; (2) train easy-to-discriminate signals; (3) train and subsequently elicit responses singularly; (4) train only one response per signal; (5) train all responses to be initiated and subsequently completed within a consistent structure; (6) train persistence of current operantly conditioned responses; and (7) avoid and disassociate flight responses. Adherence to these principles and incorporating them into all horse training methodologies should accelerate training success, reduce behavioral wastage of horses, and improve safety for both humans and horses.
|
|
|
|
Warren-Smith, A. K., Greetham, L., & McGreevy, P. D. (2007). Behavioral and physiological responses of horses (Equus caballus) to head lowering. Journal of Veterinary Behavior: Clinical Applications and Research, 2(3), 59–67.
Abstract: Horse trainers often report that lowering the height of a horse's head so the poll is below the height of the withers can induce a calming effect during training. Four groups of horses were used in a 2-part study to investigate the behavioral and physiological effects of head lowering in horses. In Part 1, Group A had no experimental stimuli applied and horses in Group B were trained to lower their heads when presented with a specific stimulus by the handler. The stimulus for head lowering was the application of downward pressure on the headcollar via the lead rope until the horse lowered its head such that its lips were approximately at mid-cannon (third metacarpal) height, whereupon the pressure was released. The stimulus was applied again if the horse raised its head during the 300-second test period. In Part 2, Groups C and D were aroused until their heart rates exceeded 100 beats per minute (bpm). Group C had no further experimental stimuli applied whereas Group D lowered their heads as a response to the above stimulus for a period of 300 seconds. Repeated measures analysis showed that there was no difference between the heart rate of Groups A and B or Groups C and D but that the heart rate of Groups A and B were lower than Groups C and D during the 300-second post-arousal (P < 0.001). The horses in Groups A and B were more likely to contact the handler (P < 0.001), exhibit licking and chewing (P < 0.001), rest a hindleg (P < 0.001), and sniff the ground (P < 0.001) than those in Groups C and D. The number of stimuli required to maintain the head in a lowered position was greatest during the first 30 seconds (P = 0.012 and P < 0.001, Parts 1 and 2, respectively). The current study has shown that head lowering in horses does not influence cardiac responses, even after the horses had been aroused to have their heart rates above 100 bpm. Therefore, it is not a method that will aid in calming an aroused horse in training. Contrary to popular belief, there was no association with licking-and-chewing and head lowering, nor with these behaviors and response acquisition.
|
|
