Abstract: Pferdegerechte Haltungssysteme spielen bei der heutigen Nutzung des Freizeit- oder Sportpartners Pferd eine wichtige Rolle, da naturnahe Haltungsbedingungen nur in seltenen Fällen zu realisieren sind. Sämtliche Aufstallungsformen müssen als Kompromiss angesehen werden und bieten somit Vor- und Nachteile. Die vorliegende Untersuchung verfolgte den Zweck, die Stressbelastung von Pferden in verschiedenen Haltungssystemen zu erfassen und vergleichend zu beurteilen. Während der von Mai 2006 bis Juli 2007 durchgeführten Versuche wurden 24 zwei- bis dreijährige Hannoveranerstuten für jeweils 4 Wochen in insgesamt 6 verschiedenen Haltungsformen aufgestallt. Die Haltungsvarianten beinhalteten die Einzelbox (Variante 1), die Einzelbox mit einem frei zugänglichem Paddock (Variante 2), die gemeinsame Haltung von zwei Pferden in zwei Boxen und einem angeschlossenen frei zugänglichem Auslauf (Variante 3) und die Gruppenhaltung von 6 Pferden in einer Mehrraumauslaufhaltung (Variante 4 – 6). Die Haltungsvariante 4 differierte von den Varianten 5 und 6 durch seinen ungegliederten Liegebereich. In den Variante 5 und 6 wurde der Liegebereich der Gruppenhaltung durcheine über die halbe Breite reichende Trennwand in zwei Bereiche unterteilt. Die Trennwand befand sich in Haltungsvariante 5 im rechten Winkel an die Außenwand grenzend, während sie in Variante 6 an der der Stallgasse zugewandten Seite des Liegebereichs aufgestellt wurde. Um eine Vergleichbarkeit mit einem Reitpferd zu schaffen, wurden alle Pferde in allen Haltungssystemen täglich für circa eine Stunde in einer Freilaufanlage bewegt. Die Stressbelastung wurde mittels der Messung der Herzfrequenzvariabilität (Parameter pNN50 und SD1) und der Bestimmung fäkaler Cortisolmetaboliten erfasst. Zusätzlich wurden Videoauswertungen hinsichtlich der Beobachtung von Verhaltensauffälligkeiten in den Haltungsvarianten 1 und 2 durchgeführt. Die durchschnittlich niedrigste Stressbelastung erfuhren die Pferde durch die Haltungsvarianten 4 (pNN50: 46,32 %, SD1:158,58 ms, Cortisolmetaboliten: 21,01nmol/kg Kot) und 6 (pNN50: 47,1 %, SD1: 144,62 ms, Cortisolmetaboliten: 21,01 nmol/kg Kot). DieAuswertung der pNN50- und Cortisolmetabolitenwerte ergab die größte Stressbelastung der Pferde in den Varianten 1 (pNN50: 42,81 %, SD1: 134,52 ms, Cortisolmetaboliten: 28,56 nmol/kg Kot) und 3 (pNN50: 42,41 %, SD1: 135,36, Cortisolmetaboliten: 28,60 nmol/kg Kot). Die Auswertung der SD1-Werte zeigte zusätzlich noch eine hohe Stressbelastung der Pferde in der Variante 5 (pNN50: 44,83 %, SD1: 119,24 ms, Cortisolmetaboliten: 27,18 nmol/kg Kot). Die Haltungsvariante 2 (pNN50: 45,77 %, SD1: 144,25 ms, Cortisolmetaboliten: 27,59 nmol/kg Kot) beziehungsweise die Varianten 2 und 5 (bei der Betrachtung der pNN50- und der Cortisolmetabolitenwerte) verursachten im Durchschnitt eine mittlere Stressbelastung. Teilweise waren die Unterschiede jedoch zu gering um die Signifikanzgrenze zu überschreiten. Die Betrachtung der einzelnen Pferde und der Pferdegruppen ergab große interindividuelle Unterschiede und deutliche gruppenspezifische Gemeinsamkeiten. Die Position eines Tieres in der Rangordnung hatte in diesen Untersuchungen bei der Betrachtung der Mittelwerte keinen Einfluss auf die Stressbelastung in Abhängigkeit derHaltungsvariante. Vielmehr zeigten sich auch hier deutliche individuelle Unterschiede in der Stressanfälligkeit und den Vorlieben der einzelnen Pferde bezüglich der verschiedenen Haltungssysteme. Die Analyse der Videoaufzeichnungen ergab, dass mehrere Pferde Kreisbewegungen in der Einzelbox ohne Auslauf (Variante 1) zeigten, während in der Variante 2 (Paddockbox) kein Pferd durch Kreisbewegungen auffiel. Andere Verhaltensauffälligkeiten oder gar Verhaltensstörungen wurden nicht beobachtet. Bei der Auswertung der Aufenthaltshäufigkeit und der Aufenthaltesdauer in den 4 Boxenquadranten zeigten sich einige Pferde sehr aktiv, was ein Hinweis auf eventuelle Unruhe oder Nervosität sein kann, während andere Pferde im Vergleich zum Gruppendurchschnitt sehr ruhig wirkten, da sie sich in der Box kaum bewegten und über lange Zeitabschnitte in einem Quadranten standen. Obwohl die Gruppenhaltung für die Mehrzahl der Pferde eine geringere Stressbelastung bedeutete und auch hinsichtlich des Bewegungs- und Sozialverhaltens am artgerechtesteneinzustufen ist, sollte für jedes Pferd individuell unter Berücksichtigung seines Alters, seiner Rasse, seines Nutzungsgrades, aber vor allem seines Charakters und seiner Erfahrungen im Sozialverhalten ein passendes großzügig bemessenes Haltungssystem ermittelt werden, um die durch das Haltungssystem ausgeübte Stressbelastung zu minimieren und das Wohlbefinden der Pferde zu steigern.
[Horse-appropriate husbandry plays an important role in the current recreational use of sport horses, since close-to-nature husbandry conditions can only be realized in rare cases. All forms of stables must be seen as a compromise and thus offer both advantages and disadvantages. The current studies were aimed at documenting and comparatively judging the stress on horse in various husbandry systems. In the studies conducted from May 2006 to July 2007, 24 two- to three-year old Hanover mares were each kept for four weeks in a total of six different types of husbandry. The husbandry forms included the single box (Variation 1), single box with a freely accessible paddock (Variation 2), the common keeping of two horses in two boxes and an attached freely accessible yards (Variation 3) and group husbandry of six horses in a multi-room yards husbandry facility (Variations 4-6). Husbandry Variation 4 differs from Variations 5 and 6 through its non-divided lying area. In the Variations 5 and 6, the lying area of the group is divided through a dividing wall extending over half the width of the area. The dividing wall in husbandry variation 5 was at a right angle to the external wall, while in Variation 6 it was placed on the stable passage side of the lying areas. In order to create comparability with riding horses, all horses in the husbandry systems were moved for about one hour on an area in a free yard. The stress level was measured on the basis of heart frequency variability (Parameter pNN50 and SD1) and the determination of faecal Cortisol metabolites. In addition video evaluations were made of conspicuous behaviour in the Variations 1 and 2. The average lowest stress was experienced by the horses in Variation 4 (pNN50: 46.32 %, SD1: 158.58 ms, Cortisol metabolites: 21.01 nmol/kg faeces) and 6 (pNN50: 47.1 %, SD1: 144.62 ms, Cortisol metabolites: 21.01 nmol/kg faeces). The evaluation of the pNN50 and the Cortisol metabolite values resulted in the greatest stress for the horses in Variation 1(pNN50: 42.81 %, SD1: 134,52 ms, Cortisol metabolites: 28,56 nmol/kg faeces) and 3 (pNN50: 42.41 %, SD1: 135.36 ms, Cortisol metabolites: 28.60 nmol/kg faeces). The evaluation of the SD1 values also showed additional stress for the horses in Variation 5 (pNN50: 44.83 %, SD1: 119.24 ms, Cortisol metabolites: 27.18 nmol/kg faeces). Variation 2 (pNN50: 45.77 %, SD1: 144.25 ms, Cortisol metabolites: 27.59 nmol/kg faeces) or rather the Variations 2 and 5 (in observing the pNN50- and Cortisol metabolite values) caused on average a medium stress level. Sometimes the differences were too low to exceed the level of significance. The observation of individual horses and groups of horses resulted in great inter-individual differences and clear group-specific points in common. The position of the horse in the animal hierarchy had no influence on the stress on the animals in this study. Much more, the clear individual differences in susceptibility to stress and a preference of the individual horses for different husbandry systems. The analyses of the videos show that more horses showed circular movements in the single stable without a yard (Variation 1), while in Variation 2 no horse was conspicuous with circular movements. Other conspicuous or disturbed behaviour was not observed. In the evaluation of the frequency and duration of presence in the four quadrant boxes, some horses were very active, a sign of possible excitement or nervousness, while other horses appeared very quiet in comparison to the group average, since they hardly moved in the box and stood in the quadrants for longer periods of time. Although the group husbandry presented less stress for the majority of the horses, also in regard to the most animal appropriate movement and social behaviour, an individual evaluation of each horse should be made considering his age, race, and type of use, but above all considering his character and experiences in social behaviour in the appropriate husbandry system in order to minimize the stress caused by the husbandry system and to increase the horse’s well-being.]

Abstract: Three horses (Equus caballus) with a history of performing cognitive tasks including discrimination learning, categorization, and concept use were tested to evaluate their long-term memory (LTM) in three experiments. In addition, use of LCD multi-displays for stimulus presentation was incorporated into cognition testing protocol for the first time with horses. Experiment 1 tested LTM for discrimination learning that originally occurred 6 years earlier. Five sets of stimuli were used and the two horses tested showed no decrement in performance on four of the sets; however, both horses did score below chance on one set. Experiment 2 examined long-term categorization recall 10 years after horses had demonstrated the ability to make stimulus selections based on shared characteristics within a given category. The horse tested for LTM after the decade-long interval immediately and consistently applied the previously learned categorization rule to not only familiar but also novel sets of stimuli. Experiment 3 tested another horse for LTM for a relative size concept. This horse had originally demonstrated concept rule use in order to select stimuli based on their relative size to one another. More than 7 years later and without further training, this horse reliably applied the previously established size concept to both familiar and novel sets of stimuli. These findings are the first reports of long-term categorical and conceptual memory in horses and are consistent with observations of domestic and wild horses, which indicate that behavioral and ecological events may be remembered for long periods of time. These studies also demonstrate the adaptive nature of horses with regard to their ability to generalize over several different testing conditions.

Abstract: Soiled bedding influences cleanliness and disease levels in dairy cows and there is no evidence of an inherent latrine behaviour in cattle. If cows were trained to use a concrete area of the housing system as a latrine, a cleaner bed could be maintained. Thirteen group-housed, 14-16-month-old Holstein-Friesian heifers, were clicker trained with heifer-rearing concentrate pellets as a reward. Training was carried out in four phases. (Phase 1) Association of feed reward with clicker, criterion: 34/40 correct responses. (Phase 2) Simple task (nose-butting a disc) to reinforce phase 1 association, criterion: 17/20 correct responses. (Phase 3) Association of eliminative behaviour with reward where criterion was four sessions with only one incorrect response: criteria for each heifer in phases 1-3 were set using binomial tests. (Phase 4) Shaping eliminative behaviour to occur on concrete. Possible responses were, eliminating on concrete (C) or straw (S), or moving from one substrate to another immediately before eliminating: C --> S, S --> C. Heifers were rewarded for the desired behaviours C and S --> C and ignored when S and C --> S occurred. If learning was achieved, C should increase as C --> S decreased and S --> C should increase as S decreased: tested with Spearman rank correlations. All heifers achieved criterion by day 4 of phase 1 (P = 0.001); day 1 of phase 2 (P = 0.001) and day 10 of phase 3 (P < 0.009). Responses changed throughout phase 3 beginning with (i) looking at the trainer whilst voiding then moving to trainer after the click, and later including (ii) moving to trainer immediately before- or (iii) during voiding. No relationship was found between S and S --> C (rs = -0.14; P = 0.63) or C and C --> S (rs = -0.33; P = 0.25). All group members eliminated more often on concrete (580) than on straw (141) but four heifers with consistently longer lying bouts also showed more C --> S before lying down (Mann-Whitney, P = 0.007). The present study is believed to be the first reported work to show that cattle can be trained to show an awareness of their own eliminative behaviour. This was not successfully shaped to latrine behaviour, however, and it is suggested that floor type may not have been a sufficiently salient cue. Voiding on straw occurred largely with response C --> S (0.73) and general behaviour suggested that this was strongly linked to lying patterns of individual heifers.