Abstract: The aim of the present study was to compare horses' heart rate (HR), heart rate variability (RMSSD, pNN50) and behaviour in the same temperament test when being ridden, led, and released free. Behavioural measurements included scores and linear measurements for reactivity (R), activity (A), time to calm down (T) and emotionality (E), recorded during the approach (1) and/or during confrontation with the stimulus (2). Sixty-five horses were each confronted 3 times (1 ridden, 1 led, 1 free running in balanced order) with 3 novel and/or sudden stimuli. Mixed model analysis indicated that leading resulted in the lowest (P < 0.05 throughout) reactions as measured by A1, A2, E1, E2, R2, and pNN50 while riding produced the strongest (A1, T2, HR, RMSSD, pNN50) or medium (E1, E2, R2) reactions. Free running resulted either in the strongest (A2, E1, E2, R2) or in the lowest (A1, T2, HR, RMSSD, pNN50) reactions. The repeatability across tests for HR (0.57), but not for RMSSD (0.23) or pNN50 (0.25) was higher than for any behavioural measurement: the latter ranged from values below 0.10 (A1, A2, T2) to values between 0.30 and 0.45 (E1, E2, R2). Overall, the results show that a rider or handler influences, but not completely masks, the horses' intrinsic behaviour in a temperament test, and this influence appeared to be stronger on behavioural variables and heart rate variability than on the horses' heart rates. Taking both practical considerations and repeatabilities into account, reactivity appears to be the most valuable parameter. Emotionality and heart rate can also yield valid results reflecting additional dimensions of temperament although their practical relevance may be less obvious. If a combination of observed variables is chosen with care, a valid assessment of a horse's temperament may be possible in all types of tests. However, in practice, tests that resemble the practical circumstances most closely, i.e. testing riding horses under a rider, should be chosen.

Abstract: Group housing of horses is not widely applied in practice despite the welfare advantages of keeping animals socially rather than individually. In particular, concerns have been raised about the possible increased risk of injury and how to introduce a new horse into an established group. This study investigated two hypotheses: (1) pre-exposure of young horses in neighbouring boxes reduces the frequency of aggressive interactions when the same horses are subsequently put together in a paddock compared to horses without this previous box experience, (2) the occurrence of aggressive behaviour, in particular contact aggression in the paddock can be predicted after observing the horses' social interactions in neighbouring boxes. Danish Warmblood mares (n = 20), 2 years old, were kept in two groups of 10 horses. In total, 60 encounters were arranged whereby each horse was confronted pair-wise with six horses from the other group, three according to each treatment: treatment I--box (B) and subsequent paddock meeting (BP), and treatment II--only paddock meeting (P). Horses met in neighbouring boxes for 5 min and together in the same paddock for 10 min. The frequencies of aggressive and non-aggressive interactions were analysed from video recordings. Total aggression levels between BP and P did not differ, but [`]contact aggression', i.e. bite, kick, strike, push, tended to be lower in BP compared to P (median BP = 1, P = 2; p = 0.083) and there were less bites in BP than P (median BP = 0, P = 1; p = 0.050). Frequencies of [`]non-aggressive' interactions, e.g. friendly approach, nasal sniff, were lower in BP than P (median BP = 2.5, P = 10; p < 0.01). Results further revealed that [`]bite threat' performed in boxes correlated with [`]contact aggression' in the paddock (r = 0.46, p = 0.011). In conclusion, pre-exposure of young horses in neighbouring boxes may reduce [`]contact aggression', especially biting, in the paddock and [`]bite threat' shown in boxes may help to predict contact aggression when horses are later turned out together. The reduced non-aggressive interactions in the paddock in the BP test were probably a consequence of horses having exchanged these behaviours in the preceding B test. Exposing young horses in boxes next to each other may be a helpful tool before mixing them because horses meet in a safe environment that could assist in reducing the type of aggression where horses are most at risk of being injured.

Abstract: Recent studies have suggested that crib-biting in horses is associated with diminished capacity of learning or coping with stress. Such findings raise the question whether trainability, which is fundamentally important in practice, could also be affected by stereotypic behaviour. Trainability of a horse is difficult to assess in simple tests, however, it is reliably estimated by experienced riders. To assess trainability and other characteristics related to that, a questionnaire survey was conducted with the owners of 50 crib-biting and 50 control horses. Where possible, control horses were selected from the same establishment as crib-biters. Groups did not differ significantly regarding age, breed, gender, training level or usage. Principal component analysis revealed three main factors which can be labelled as [`]Anxiety', [`]Affability' and [`]Trainability'. The [`]Anxiety' factor consisted of the items [`]Nervousness', [`]Excitability', [`]Panic', [`]Inconsistent emotionality', [`]Vigilance', [`]Skittishness', and [`]Timidity'. [`]Affability' consisted of [`]Friendliness toward people', [`]Cooperation', [`]Docility' and [`]Friendliness toward horses'. [`]Trainability' involved [`]Concentration', [`]Trainability', [`]Memory', and [`]Perseverance'. Temperament traits were not affected by age, gender, breed or training level, but the usage of the horse and the presence of crib-biting behaviour had significant effects. Competition horses had lower level of [`]Anxiety' (p = 0.032) and higher level of [`]Trainability' (p = 0.068) than leisure horses. Crib-biting horses had significantly lower level of [`]Anxiety' than control horses (p < 0.001), while [`]Trainability' and [`]Affability' did not differ between groups (p = 0.823 and p = 0.543, respectively). Competition horses are more often exposed to novel environment and to frightening stimuli (e.g. colourful obstacles) than leisure horses and therefore might have also become more habituated to these types of stimuli. Coping with novel situation may be enhanced by defusing nervous behaviour by the more experienced riders of competition. Previous studies indicated crib-biting horses to be less reactive when challenged as compared to control horses. We suggest that the virtual calmness and lower nervousness of the crib-biting horses might be due to the passive coping style of these animals. [`]Affability' of horses might be more related to housing and management conditions than to crib-biting. Contrary to expectations, scores on [`]Trainability' had not coincided with the impaired learning of crib-biting horses reported in laboratory tests. However, previous behavioural tests on equine learning rarely had a direct relevance to the training abilities of the horses. Our results do not support crib-biting stereotypy to affect performance in training, which is a complex learning process involving cooperation and docility in the social environment.

Abstract: Unwanted oral investigative in horses has been anecdotally attributed to the practice of hand-feeding. Fears over such behaviour developing as a consequence of using food rewards, for example in clicker training, have been implicated as a common reason for not employing food-based positive reinforcement training techniques. This study used data generated as part of a larger research project, and explored associations between five common oral investigative behaviours and the practices of hand-feeding and clicker training. Data were from a convenience sample of UK leisure horse owners using two self-administered Internet surveys. Ninety-one percent of respondents reported giving their horse food by hand and this practice was significantly associated with three of the five oral investigative behaviours, licking hands (P = 0.006), gently searching clothing (P < 0.001) and roughly searching clothing (P = 0.003). Nipping hands and biting clothes were not associated with hand-feeding, suggesting that risk factors for these behaviours originate outside of this practice. Clicker training techniques were employed by 14% of respondents and their use was not associated with the incidence of any of the five oral investigative behaviours. These findings suggest that horse owners should not be deterred from using food-based positive reinforcement techniques with their horses, as fears that this practice will result in unwanted oral investigative behaviours from their horses appear unfounded.

Abstract: Removing a horse from its social group may be considered risky, both for the handler and the horse, because other horses can interfere in the catching process. The main aim of this study was to identify where and when these risk situations occur while removing a horse from its group. A potential risk situation was defined by the closeness of loose horses in the group or by any physical contact with them. Whether the number of horses following would be influenced by the social rank of the horse being led out, and whether more horses would follow to the gate when a larger proportion of the group was removed compared to when a single horse was taken out were also investigated. Thirty-two mares (1–2 years) were kept in groups of four. All horses were taken out of their home paddock twice alone (64 tests) and twice with a companion (32 tests). One handler (or two handlers when two horses were removed) was asked to approach (phase 1) and catch the target horse (phase 2), walk it to the centre of the paddock and remain stationary at a post for 30 s (phase 3), walk to the paddock entrance (phase 4) and through the gate (phase 5). The number of horses following, and the number of loose horses in proximity (<2 m, 2–5 m) to the target horse and handler was estimated, and horse–horse and horse–human interactions were recorded continuously for the five scoring phases. Significantly more loose horses were within 2 m of a single target horse during the phases approach (mean ± SD: 1.5 ± 0.8), catch (1.6 ± 0.9) and post (1.7 ± 0.7) than during walk (1.0 ± 0.5) and gate (1.1 ± 0.6). Rank did not influence the number of horses following to the gate (high rank: 2.4 ± 0.7; lower rank: 2.0 ± 1.0; P = 0.396) and interactions between horses were rare. A greater proportion of the loose horses followed when two horses (0.9 ± 0.2) were removed compared to when a single horse (0.7 ± 0.3) was taken out (P = 0.011). In conclusion, maintaining a distance to other horses in the group by reducing the time being relatively stationary, so giving loose horses fewer chances to approach, is likely to contribute to improved handler's safety. Removing a small proportion of the group may also decrease the probability of the other horses following.