Abstract: This paper describes a method in which horses learn to communicate by touching different neutral visual symbols, in order to tell the handler whether they want to have a blanket on or not. Horses were trained for 10-15min per day, following a training program comprising ten steps in a strategic order. Reward based operant conditioning was used to teach horses to approach and touch a board, and to understand the meaning of three different symbols. Heat and cold challenges were performed to help learning and to check level of understanding. At certain stages, a learning criterion of correct responses for 8-14 successive trials had to be achieved before proceeding. After introducing the free choice situation, on average at training day 11, the horse could choose between a “no change” symbol and the symbol for either “blanket on” or “blanket off” depending on whether the horse already wore a blanket or not. A cut off point for performance or non-performance was set to day 14, and 23/23 horses successfully learned the task within this limit. Horses of warm-blood type needed fewer training days to reach criterion than cold-bloods (P<0.05). Horses were then tested under differing weather conditions. Results show that choices made, i.e. the symbol touched, was not random but dependent on weather. Horses chose to stay without a blanket in nice weather, and they chose to have a blanket on when the weather was wet, windy and cold (χ2=36.67, P<0.005). This indicates that horses both had an understanding of the consequence of their choice on own thermal comfort, and that they successfully had learned to communicate their preference by using the symbols. The method represents a novel tool for studying preferences in horses.

Abstract: Abstract Habituated horses have been found to have a calming effect on conspecifics in fear-eliciting situations. In practice, experienced horses are often used as companions when young horses are introduced to potentially frightening situations, like loading onto a trailer. However, studies of social transmission of habituation in horses are scarce. This study investigated if demonstration by a habituated demonstrator horse influenced the willingness of young Icelandic horses (n = 22, 3 years old) to cross a novel surface. Observer horses (n = 11) were allowed to observe the similarly aged demonstrator horse being led five times across a novel surface. Immediately afterwards the observer horses were given the opportunity to cross the novel surface themselves to obtain food on the other side. Controls (n = 11) were allowed to observe the demonstrator eating on the opposite side of the novel surface but not the demonstration of crossing the novel surface. All observers and controls succeeded the task, but observers had significantly lower average and maximum heart rate, compared to controls. This result suggests a calming effect of the demonstration, which could be exploited for habituation training of horses in fear-eliciting situations.

Abstract: Social interactions facilitate animals learning of new features of their environment minimizing a trial and error process. It has been observed in some species that food cues can be acquired by one individual (the observer) from an animal model (demonstrator) due to social learning. Three experiments were performed to evaluate whether weaned piglets may show a preference for a flavoured feed following brief social interactions (30min) with an experienced demonstrator. After the social interaction between demonstrator and observer pigs, a 30-min choice test between the flavoured feed previously eaten by demonstrators (DEM-feed) and other flavoured feed (OTH-feed; Exp. 1 and 2) or a known unflavoured starter diet (Exp. 3) was performed with observer animals. Greater intake of DEM-feed occurred when demonstrators and observers were from the same pen (Exp. 1) or from the same litter (Exp. 2), but not when observers and demonstrators were unfamiliar with each other (Exp. 1). Observers also preferred flavours previously eaten by the demonstrator over their unflavoured diet already known. Social interactions with a conspecific pig that had a recent experience with a flavoured feed enhanced the preference for that feed and could even override neophobia to a new feed. The familiarity of conspecific demonstrators plays a key role in social learning of new feed cues probably due to selective exploration involving closer snout-to-snout contacts with kin conspecifics.

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.

Abstract: Current scores for equine personality traits assessed during performance tests are characterised by high means and inadequate variation, hampering genetic selection for these traits. A number of temperament and related behaviour tests have been developed in order to make assessment of equine personality more objective. However, rarely these tests have been validated for their use as a selection tool. Thus, as a first step the aim of the present study was to integrate a temperament tests into horse performance tests, in order to assess variability and repeatability of horses’ reactivity under the rider and the reliability of the judges’ assessment thereof. The temperament test was comprised of three novel stimuli, including a visual stimulus (BALL), a visual and tactile stimulus (GATE), and a visual and auditory stimulus (CANS). A total of 224 mares and stallions were subjected to the test during their participation in station performance tests for riding horses, and 133 of these horses were subjected to the test a second time either 2–3 weeks or 18 weeks after the first test. Horses were ridden in the test by professional riders, and their reactions to the stimuli were evaluated each by two judges and the rider using scores on a scale from 1 (task not concluded) to 10 (completely calm but attentive horse). Mean scores (±SD) ranged between 6.6 ± 2.4 (GATE) and 7.8 ± 2.1 (BALL), demonstrating lower means and considerably higher standard deviations than the same horses’ scores from present evaluation of the trait labelled temperament (8.1 ± 0.9) or related personality traits (e.g. character: 8.3 ± 0.8). Using variance components from mixed model analysis, inter-observer agreement between the two judges was for the individual stimuli very high (0.95 (BALL), 0.96 (GATE), 0.89 (CANS)), and there was likewise high agreement between the judges’ and the riders’ combined scores (0.93). Repeatabilities of horses’ scores were 0.72 (BALL), 0.75 (GATE), and 0.69 (CANS). Correlations to traits from the present evaluation of personality were low or non-existent, indicating that these traits are not a reflection of anxiety or fear reactivity as assessed by novel object tests. Horses’ improvement in judges’ combined scores from first to second test was not (P > 0.1) influenced by differences in time between tests, but differed between breed-types and individual riders. Also, not surprisingly, the higher horses’ scores in the first test were, the lower their improvement in the second test was (-0.45 ± 0.06 per additional score in the first test). Temperament tests using novel stimuli presented to horses under a rider may be a practical and valid tool for improving the current assessment of equine personality traits during performance tests. Considering a combination of absolute scores and horses’ improvement in scores of repeated tests, rather than measuring only absolute scores yields relevant information about horses’ personality, and at the same time it may prevent owners from deliberately training their horses for low reactions to the test-stimuli.