Abstract: Common cuckoos (Cuculus canorus) are obligate brood parasites, laying eggs into nests of small songbirds. The cuckoo hatchling evicts all eggs and young from a nest, eliminating hosts' breeding success. Despite the consistently high costs of parasitism by common cuckoos, great reed warbler (Acrocephalus arundinaceus) hosts sometime accept and other times reject parasitic eggs. To explore the cognitive basis of this seemingly maladaptive variation in host responses, we documented differences in egg rejection rates within 1-day periods just before and during the egg-laying cycle across host nests. Hosts rejected cuckoo eggs at 28% of nests during the pre-egg-laying stage, but when cuckoos exchanged the first host egg with the parasite egg, rejections increased to 75%. Even later, when several host eggs remained in a nest after parasitism, rejection rate fell to 37.5%. Experimental parasitism with conspecific eggs on the first and second day of host laying showed a similar directional change in relative rejection rates, dropping from 35 to 0%. Mistakes in egg discrimination (ejection error and ejection cost) were observed mostly in the latter part of the laying cycle, mainly when nests contained 5-6 eggs. These correlational and experimental patterns of egg rejection support a cognitive process of egg discrimination through several shifts in hosts' optimal acceptance thresholds of foreign eggs. The results are also consistent with the evolution of foreign egg rejection in the context of nest-sanitation (i.e. the removal of foreign objects). Our results suggest that common cuckoo hosts may recognize more eggs than they reject. This implies that the experience of the host with one or more of its own eggs in the clutch is a key factor in rejecting parasite eggs by allowing inspection and learning about their own clutch.

Abstract: Summary Spatial orientation has played an extremely important role in the development of ideas about the behavioral capacities of animals. Indeed, as the modern scientific study of animal behavior emerged from its roots in zoology and experimental psychology, studies of spatial orientation figured in the work of many of the pioneering researchers, including Tinbergen (), von ), Watson () and .

Abstract: Abstract  Relational learning, as opposed to perceptual learning, is based on the abstract properties of the stimuli. Although at present there is no doubt that pigeons are capable of relational behavior, this study aims to further disclose the conditions under which it occurs. Pigeons were trained in an outdoor cage on a matching-to-sample or an oddity-from-sample task, with colored cardboard stimuli presented horizontally. The apparatus involved three sliding lids on which the stimuli were drawn and which, when displaced, revealed the reinforcement. The lids were either adjacent to each other or somewhat separated. Training sessions involved two colors, and test sessions six different colors (same dimension test), or six different shapes (different dimension test). One group of birds trained under the “adjacent” condition failed when tested with new stimuli, but succeeded in both dimension tests after training under the “separate” condition. Two other groups of birds succeeded in all tests after training under the latter condition. These results show that depending on procedural details, pigeons are or are not able to transfer from one visual dimension to another, thus extending previous related findings.

Abstract: Four methods of ranking horses on reactivity were evaluated and compared: isolation from conspecifics, presentation of a static novel stimulus, traversing a novel stimulus in a runway (isolation, novel stimulus and runways tests, respectively) and assigning subjective emotionality scores. Forty horses performed each of the three tests daily on three different days in a switchback design where treatments were injection of a tranquilizer or vehicle. Horses were randomly assigned a daily test sequence, which was maintained throughout the study. In all tests, heart rates were recorded and behavior was videotaped. To be considered a valid test of reactivity, at least one heart rate and one behavioural measurement in the test had to show a significant difference due to tranquilization, and behavioural measures had to be displayed in at least 75% of the trials. In the runway test, no significant difference in heart rate values in tranquilized and non-tranquilized horses was found, and no behavioural attribute was displayed in more than 52% of the trials; therefore it was rejected as a valid test of reactivity. Both isolation and novel stimulus tests produced valid measurements. Mean heart rate was the most precise physiological measure for these tests, and walking and defecation frequency were the most precise behavioural measures for novel stimulus and isolation tests, respectively. Mean heart rates on the novel stimulus and isolation tests were correlated (rs=0.79, P<0.01) indicating that these tests produced similar rankings based on physiological responses. However, behavioural measures ranked horses differently (rs=0.27, P<0.10) on the tests. Rank correlations between mean heart rates and behavioural measures were higher in the novel stimulus (rs = 0.66, P<0.01) than the isolation test (rs = 0.55, P<0.01), indicating that the novel stimulus test ranked horses based on either physiological or behavioural responses more similarly than did the isolation test. Therefore, the novel stimulus test was considered the more accurate evaluation of reactivity. Subjective emotionality scores were correlated moderately with mean heart rates (rs > 0.33, P<0.01) from the novel stimulus and isolation tests and with walking scores (rs = 0.47, P<0.01) from the novel stimulus test. Assignment of subjective emotionality scores was not as accurate as the novel stimulus or isolation tests in ranking horses for reactivity. Using physiological data alone, combining physiological and behavioural measurements or using more than one behavioural measurement in reactivity tests may reflect the reactivity of the horse better than a single behavioural measurement.

Abstract: REASONS FOR PERFORMING STUDY: In many equestrian activities a specific position of head and/or neck is required that is dissimilar to the natural position. There is controversy about the effects of these positions on locomotion pattern, but few quantitative data are available. OBJECTIVES: To quantify the effects of 5 different head and neck positions on thoracolumbar kinematics of the horse. METHODS: Kinematics of 7 high level dressage horses were measured walking and trotting on an instrumented treadmill with the head and neck in the following positions: HNP2 = neck raised, bridge of the nose in front of the vertical; HNP3 = as HNP2 with bridge of the nose behind the vertical; HNP4 = head and neck lowered, nose behind the vertical; HNP5 = head and neck in extreme high position; HNP6 = head and neck forward and downward. HNP1 was a speed-matched control (head and neck unrestrained). RESULTS: The head and neck positions affected only the flexion-extension motion. The positions in which the neck was extended (HNP2, 3, 5) increased extension in the anterior thoracic region, but increased flexion in the posterior thoracic and lumbar region. For HNP4 the pattern was the opposite. Positions 2, 3 and 5 reduced the flexion-extension range of motion (ROM) while HNP4 increased it. HNP5 was the only position that negatively affected intravertebral pattern symmetry and reduced hindlimb protraction. The stride length was significantly reduced at walk in positions 2, 3, 4 and 5. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant influence of head/neck position on back kinematics. Elevated head and neck induce extension in the thoracic region and flexion in the lumbar region; besides reducing the sagittal range of motion. Lowered head and neck produces the opposite. A very high position of the head and neck seems to disturb normal kinematics. POTENTIAL RELEVANCE: This study provides quantitative data on the effect of head/neck positions on thoracolumbar motion and may help in discussions on the ethical acceptability of some training methods.