Abstract: Current definitions of horse personality traits are rather vague, lacking clear, universally accepted guidelines for evaluation in performance tests. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to screen behavioural and physiological measurements taken during riding for potential links with scores the same horses received in the official stallion performance test for rideability and personality traits. Behaviour, heart rate (HR) and HR variability from thirty-six stallions participating in a performance test were recorded repeatedly during their performance test training. Using the coefficient of determination, regression analysis revealed that about 1/3 of variation (ranging between r = 0.26 (“constitution” (i.e. fitness, health)) and r = 0.46 (rideability)) in the personality trait scores could be explained by selecting the three most influential behaviour patterns per trait. These behaviour patterns included stumbling (with all traits except character), head-tossing (temperament, rideability), tail-swishing (willingness to work), involuntary change in gait (character) and the rider's use of her/his hands (constitution, rideability), voice (temperament) or whip (constitution). Subsequent mixed model analysis revealed a significant (P < 0.05) influence of the behaviour pattern “horse-induced change in gait” on character (-0.98 ± 0.31 scores per additional occurrence of change in gaits), of head-tossing (-0.25 ± 0.08 scores) and rider's use of voice (-0.51 ± 0.25; P = 0.0594) on temperament, and of stumbling on each of the following: willingness to work (-2.5 ± 1.2), constitution (-2.5 ± 1.2 scores; P = 0.0516) and rideability scores (-3.3 ± 1.4). In addition, constitution scores tended (P = 0.0889) to increase with higher low frequency/high frequency heart rate variation ratios (LF/HF), indicating a shift towards sympathetic dominance and thus a higher stress load in horses with higher scores for constitution. Rideability scores from the training phase were also significantly influenced by head-tossing (-0.5 ± 0.1), and in addition rideability scores from the final test were influenced by the training rider, ranging between average estimated rideability scores of 6.8 ± 0.4 for one training rider and 8.36 ± 0.3 scores for another training rider. Horses ridden with their nose-line predominantly behind the vertical received higher scores for rideability (8.3 ± 0.3) than horses ridden with their nose-line at the vertical (7.7 ± 0.2). These findings indicate that either judges perceive horses to have a better rideability when they readily offer a more extreme poll flexion, or that riders make use of horses’ better rideability by imposing a more extreme poll flexion. Several of the above described associations, but also of the non-existing links (e.g. no association between shying or heart rate and temperament) between behaviour patterns and scores for personality traits are rather surprising, warranting further investigation regarding the underlying causes of these relationships. Some of these behaviour patterns should be considered when redesigning the current guidelines for evaluation of personality traits during breeding horse performance tests, ultimately leading to improved genetic selection for equine personality traits. However, ethical implication of defining aversive behaviour such as head-tossing as an indicator of, for example, poor temperament, should not be neglected when devising new guidelines: such aversive behaviour may in fact be an indication of inadequate training techniques rather than poor horse personality.

Abstract: From the viewpoint of experimental psychology, there are two problems with our current knowledge of equine perception. The first is that the behavioral and neurophysiological research in this area has enormous gaps, reflecting that this animal is not a convenient laboratory subject. The second is that the horse, having been a close companion to humans for many millennia, entrenched anecdotal wisdom is often hard to separate from scientific fact. Therefore, any summary at present of equine perception has to be provisional. The horse appears to have developed a visual system particularly sensitive to dim light and movement, it may or may not have a weak form of color vision in part of the retina, it has little binocular overlap, and its best acuity is limited to a restricted horizontal band which is aimed primarily by head/neck movements. However, the total field of view is very large. Overall, as would be expected for a prey animal, horse vision appears to have evolved more for detection of predator approach from any angle than for accurate visual identification of stationary objects, especially those seen at a distance. It is likely that, as for most mammals except the primates, horses rely more heavily on their other senses for forming a view of their world. Equine high-frequency hearing extends far above that of humans, but horses may be less able to localize the point of origin of brief sounds. The horse's capacity for chemoreception and its reliance on chemical information for identification may more closely resemble that of the dog than of the human. Its tactile sensitivity is high, and the ability of its brain and body to regulate pain perception appears to be similar to that found in other mammals. There is room for a great deal of future research in both the area of equine perception and sensory-based cognition, but for the present time persons interacting with this animal should be made aware of the importance of the sounds they make, the movements of their bodies, the way they touch the animal, and the odors they emit or carry on their clothing.

Abstract: This study investigated drinking behaviour of unhandled, semi-feral Dartmoor ponies. Aspects studied were drinking behaviour, latency to drink from novel unfamiliar drinkers after transport, preferences for different types of artificial water drinkers, effects of mixing with unfamiliar ponies and group size, on drinking behaviour, and the effect of a simulated market on the latency to drink. Ponies were tested in groups of three or six animals, or as individuals in test pens that were equipped with three water drinkers: bucket, automatic drinking bowl, flowing water trough. Behaviour was recorded using time-lapse video. An individual pony drank on average 10 l per day. Ponies also drank, but at a lower rate, during the night. The latencies to drink after 4.5 h of transport showed large variation, but most ponies drank within the first hour after being transported (all groups 80.5 ± 32.94 min, mean ± SEM). In the individual choice tests, the preferred drinkers were the bucket and the flowing water trough, but not the automatic drinking bowl (drinking time 25.2 ± 4.66, 11.5 ± 4.26, 2.4 ± 2.23 min for bucket, trough and bowl respectively, mean ± SEM; paired t-tests, bowl versus other drinkers, all tests p < 0.02). A possible reason for the avoidance of the automatic bowl was the noise it made when filling. After mixing a group of three ponies with a group of three unfamiliar animals, the ponies did not express their individual drinker preferences anymore. The use of the previously preferred bucket decreased significantly and the use of the initially, non-preferred, bowl increased significantly. This was likely caused by the fact that ponies were either intentionally or accidentally obstructing drinkers in certain areas of the pen and unfamiliar ponies did not want to push past them. In the simulated market, the differences in latencies to drink between ponies in the home pen and market groups did not reach significance. No significant effect of group size (groups of three versus six ponies) on drinking behaviour was detected. The results have implications for situations where only automatic water bowls are provided, such as during pony sales at livestock markets. Preventing ponies from expressing their drinking choice, either by offering non-preferred drinkers or by mixing with unfamiliar animals, could adversely affect their welfare especially if this happens in conjunction with other stressful events such as transport and markets, and potentially weaning.

Abstract: The effects of riding style and various management factors on the prevalence of stereotypies and other behavioural problems among 346 mixed-breed saddle horses (phase 1) and 101 Arabian horses (phase 2) were analysed through a questionnaire answered by owners. In phase 1, the questionnaire data were partially validated through 20-min observations of 81 (23.3%) of the cases. Results indicate that horses primarily ridden in the English style were reported to be significantly more likely to display stereotypies (p < 0.001), problems when transported (p = 0.001), multiple behavioural problems (p < 0.001), and to have more restrictive stabling (p < 0.001) than horses ridden with other styles. When only Arabian horses were assessed in phase 2, however, there was no significant difference in behavioural problems between the Arabian horses ridden English style versus other riding styles. However Arabian horses were housed less restrictively than horses in phase 1 and English riding style and restrictive stabling tended to exacerbate each other's association with stereotypies. Management-related effects were found when, e.g., horses housed in restrictive stabling were more frequently reported to show locomotion stereotypies (p = 0.02) and those denied ad libitum hay displayed stereotypic wood-chewing behaviour (p = 0.02). To aid diagnosing and prioritizing interventions and care, the most predictive subsets of factors were computed for the various problem behaviours. E.g., among saddle horses, a statistical model comprised of the main riding style, duration of access to a paddock, and horse's age predicted whether a horse was reported to display any behavioural problem 62% of the time. This study supports the effects of management and handling on the prevalence of behavioural problems, and helps prioritize the relative importance of broad management categories on equine welfare. In particular, it underscores the importance of riding style on the well-being of saddle horses.

Abstract: Previous studies have shown that dogs have developed a special sensitivity to the communicative signals and attentional states of humans. The aim of the current study was to further investigate what dogs know about the visual perception of humans and themselves. In the first two experiments we investigated whether dogs were sensitive to the properties of barriers as blocking the visual access of humans. We presented dogs with a situation in which a human forbade them to take a piece of food, but the type and orientation of the barrier allowed the dog to take the food undetected in some conditions. Dogs differentiated between effective and ineffective barriers, based on their orientation or the particular features of the barriers such as size or the presence of window. In the third study we investigated whether dogs know about what they themselves have seen. We presented subjects with two boxes and placed food in one of them. In the Seen condition the location of the food was shown to the dogs while in the Unseen condition dogs were prevented from seeing the destination of the food. Before selecting one of the boxes by pressing a lever, dogs had the opportunity to seek extra information regarding the contents of the boxes, which would be particularly useful in the condition in which they had not seen where the food was hidden. Dogs rarely used the opportunity to seek information about the contents of the box before making their choice in any condition. Therefore, we found no evidence suggesting that dogs have access to what they themselves have seen, which contrasts with the positive evidence about visual perspective taking in others from the first two experiments and previous studies.