Abstract: Abstract  Discrimination learning studies suggest that horses learn more easily using spatial than visible object-specific (OS) cues. However, spatial cues have generally confounded intra-array, distal and/or egocentric spatial information. It is also unclear whether conflicting cues compete for association or are redundantly encoded, and furthermore, the influence of prior experiences or training has not been quantified so far. We examined the effect of cue modality on unweaned foals’ performance in a discrimination learning task. After a pilot study confirmed that horses could perform the required OS cue discrimination, nine foals learnt to find food in one of three covered buckets, in any of four positions within a test arena. In Stage 1 the rewarded bucket was signified both by OS cues (pattern) and by relative spatial cues (position). On reaching criterion, cues were separated and foals had to ignore the inappropriate cue (Stage 2). Foals assigned to follow spatial cues (n = 5) completed Stage 2 faster than foals for whom OS cues remained consistent (n = 4). Spatial group foals all reached criterion without delay; no foal in the OS group reached criterion within the testing period. OS group foals initially persisted in responding to the previously correct position, adopting spatially-based strategies when this proved unsuccessful. The findings show for the first time that, even in the absence of distal spatial information, intra-array spatial cues were more salient than OS cues for foals in a food-finding task and learning appeared rather inflexible.

Abstract: The aim of this study was to conduct a series of paper-based exercises in order to assess the negative (adverse) welfare impacts, if any, of common interventions on domestic horses across a broad range of different contexts of equine care and training. An international panel (with professional expertise in psychology, equitation science, veterinary science, education, welfare, equestrian coaching, advocacy, and community engagement; n = 16) met over a four-day period to define and assess these interventions, using an adaptation of the domain-based assessment model. The interventions were considered within 14 contexts: C1 Weaning; C2 Diet; C3 Housing; C4 Foundation training; C5 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly medical); C6 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly surgical); C7 Elective procedures; C8 Care procedures; C9 Restraint for management procedures; C10 Road transport; C11 Activity—competition; C12 Activity—work; C13 Activity—breeding females; and C14 Activity—breeding males. Scores on a 1–10 scale for Domain 5 (the mental domain) gathered during the workshop were compared with overall impact scores on a 1–10 scale assigned by the same panellists individually before the workshop. The most severe (median and interquartile range, IQR) impacts within each context were identified during the workshop as: C1 abrupt, individual weaning (10 IQR 1); C2 feeding 100% low-energy concentrate (8 IQR 2.5); C3 indoor tie stalls with no social contact (9 IQR 1.5); C4 both (i) dropping horse with ropes (9 IQR 0.5) and forced flexion (9 IQR 0.5); C5 long-term curative medical treatments (8 IQR 3); C6 major deep intracavity surgery (8.5 IQR 1); C7 castration without veterinary supervision (10 IQR 1); C8 both (i) tongue ties (8 IQR 2.5) and (ii) restrictive nosebands (8 IQR 2.5); C9 ear twitch (8 IQR 1); C10 both (i) individual transport (7.00 IQR 1.5) and group transport with unfamiliar companions (7 IQR 1.5); C11 both (i) jumps racing (8 IQR 2.5) and Western performance (8 IQR 1.5); C12 carriage and haulage work (6 IQR 1.5); C13 wet nurse during transition between foals (7.5 IQR 3.75); and C14 teaser horse (7 IQR 8). Associations between pre-workshop and workshop scores were high, but some rankings changed after workshop participation, particularly relating to breeding practices. Domain 1 had the weakest association with Domain 5. The current article discusses the use of the domain-based model in equine welfare assessment, and offers a series of assumptions within each context that future users of the same approach may make when assessing animal welfare under the categories reported here. It also discusses some limitations in the framework that was used to apply the model.

Abstract: Behavioural observations suggest that smell is important in social discriminations between horses but balanced studies of this capacity are lacking. We used a habituation-discrimination procedure to investigate the ability of horses to distinguish between pairs of odour samples from different individuals. In Study 1, separate tests were conducted for urine, faeces or fleece fabric previously rubbed on the coat (to pick up body odour samples (BOS)) and donor pairs differed in sex, and age. 10 pregnant mares each underwent three tests, one per sample type. A test consisted of three successive 2-min presentations of a sample from Individual A with a simultaneous presentation of a sample from Individual B during the final presentation. Doubly repeated measures ANOVA indicated a main effect of sample type on investigative response (df = 2, f = 7.98, P = 0.004): durations were longer for BOS than for urine or faeces but habituation across trials was most consistent for urine. In the final presentation, mares demonstrated discrimination by investigating the novel urine sample (B) more than the repeated sample (novel: median 8.0 s, IQR = 10; repeated: median 2.5 s, IQR = 6; z = -2.558, P = 0.008). In Study 2, urine samples from castrated male donors were used and neither mares nor their 4-month-old foals discriminated between samples from different individuals in the final presentation. The findings suggest that urine odour may contain some information that horses can use to discriminate between conspecifics. This may be limited to the level of broad categories such as sex or reproductive status; further investigation is needed to reveal what functional information can be transmitted and what compounds are involved.

Abstract: Crib-biting is a common oral stereotype. Because of perceived deleterious effects on the health and appearance of subjects the prevention of crib-biting is regularly attempted. The resourcefulness of horses in satisfying their motivation to perform this behaviour often frustrates owners' efforts at prevention. This paper reviews the efficacy and observable consequences of attempting to prevent crib-biting by a variety of methods. These include attempts to prevent the grasping of objects, to interfere with air-engulfing and to introduce punishment for grasping and neck-flexion. Other approaches include the use of surgery, acupuncture, pharmaceuticals, operant feeding and environmental enrichment. A remedy that is effective for every crib-biter remains elusive. We conclude that, rather than concentrating on remedial prevention, further research should be directed at establishing why horses crib-bite and how the emergence of crib-biting can be avoided.