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.

Abstract: Rescued equids are often exposed to rehabilitation and training (or retraining) programmes to improve their physical and psychological well-being as well as to facilitate the re-homing process. Training uses either positive or negative reinforcement learning procedures and it is considered here that, there may be welfare implications associated with using the latter technique as it has the potential to overlay acute stress on animals with a chronic stress life history. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare these training strategies (negative versus positive reinforcement) on equine behaviour and physiology as the first step in establishing an optimal rehabilitation approach (from a welfare perspective) for equids that have been subjected to chronic stress in the form of long-term neglect/cruelty. Over a 7-week period, 16 ponies (aged 6–18 months) were trained using either positive (‘positive’) (n = 8) or negative reinforcement (‘negative’) (n = 8) techniques to lead in hand, stand to be groomed, traverse an obstacle course and load into a trailer. Heart rate was measured (5 s intervals) on days 1 and 4 of each training week, ‘Pre’- (1 h), ‘During’ (0.5 h) and ‘Post’- (1 h) training session. Ethograms (10.00–20.00 h) outside of the training period were also compiled twice weekly. In addition, weekly arena tests (as a measure of reactivity) were also performed 1 week before and during the 7 weeks of training. Results showed significant differences between the two training schedules for some measures during the latter stages of the trial and suggested that animals trained under a positive reinforcement schedule were more motivated to participate in the training sessions and exhibited more exploratory or ‘trial and error’ type behaviours in novel situations/environments. In this context, the incorporation of positive reinforcement schedules within a rehabilitation programme may be of benefit to the animal from a welfare perspective.

Abstract: This study examined the relationship between motor laterality in horses bred for different types of work and therefore different temperaments. Foreleg preference during grazing was measured in three populations of domestic horse, Thoroughbreds (TB, bred to race at the gallop), Standardbreds (SB, bred for pacing) and Quarter Horses (QH, in this case bred for so-called “cutting work” which involves manoeuvring individual cattle in and out of herds). With a one-sample t-test, TBs showed strong evidence of a left preference in motor laterality (P = 0.000), as did SBs (P = 0.002) but there was no convincing evidence for laterality in QH (P = 0.117). However, the increasing trend in left preference from QH to SBs then TBs was associated with increasing differences between individual horses within a breed. The overall preference (either left or right) increased with age (P = 0.008) and the rate of increase varied with breeds. The presence of a higher proportion of left-foreleg preferent individuals in TBs and SBs compared with QH may indicate that their training or selection (or both) has an effect on motor bias.

Abstract: Bringing the head and neck of ridden horses into a position of hyperflexion is widely used in equestrian sports. In our study, the hypothesis was tested that hyperflexion is an acute stressor for horses. Salivary cortisol concentrations, heart rate, heart rate variability (HRV) and superficial body temperature were determined in horses (n = 16) lunged on two subsequent days. The head and neck of the horse was fixed with side reins in a position allowing forward extension on day A and fixed in hyperflexion on day B. The order of treatments alternated between horses. In response to lunging, cortisol concentration increased (day A from 0.73 ± 0.06 to 1.41 ± 0.13 ng/ml, p < 0.001; day B from 0.68 ± 0.07 to 1.38 ± 0.13 ng/ml, p < 0.001) but did not differ between days A and B. Beat-to-beat (RR) interval decreased in response to lunging on both days. HRV variables standard deviation of RR interval (SDRR) and RMSSD (root mean square of successive RR differences) decreased (p < 0.001) but did not differ between days. In the cranial region of the neck, the difference between maximum and minimum temperature was increased in hyperflexion (p < 0.01). In conclusion, physiological parameters do not indicate an acute stress response to hyperflexion of the head alone in horses lunged at moderate speed and not touched with the whip. However, if hyperflexion is combined with active intervention of a rider, a stressful experience for the horse cannot be excluded.

Abstract: “Clicker training” is a popularly promoted training method based on operant conditioning with the use of a secondary reinforcer (the clicker). While this method draws from theories of learning and is used widely, there has been little scientific investigation of its efficacy. We used 60 horses, Equus callabus, and assigned each horse to one of six reinforcement protocols. The reinforcement protocols involved combinations of reinforcers administered (primary versus secondary plus primary), schedule of reinforcement (continuous versus variable ratio), and reinforcers applied during extinction (none or secondary). There were no differences (P>=0.11) between horses which received a secondary reinforcer (click) followed by the primary reinforcer (food) and those which received only the primary reinforcer (food) in the number of trials required to train the horses to touch their noses to a plastic cone (operant response). There also were no differences (P>=0.12) between horses which received the secondary reinforcer plus primary reinforcer and those which received only the primary reinforcer in regards to the number of trials to extinction. We conclude that there is no difference in the amount of training required to learn the operant task or in the task's resistance to extinction between horses that received a secondary reinforcer followed by a primary reinforcer versus horses which received only a primary reinforcer.