|
|
Christensen, J. W., Søndergaard, E., Thodberg, K., & Halekoh, U. (2011). Effects of repeated regrouping on horse behaviour and injuries. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 133(3), 199–206.
Abstract: Domestic horses are faced with social challenges throughout their lives due to limitations in social contact, space restrictions and frequent changes in social companionship. This is in contrast to natural conditions where horses live in relatively stable harem bands. Currently, little is known about how repeated regrouping affect horse behaviour and welfare, and it is unknown whether horses may adapt to regrouping. In this study, we aimed to investigate the effects of an unstable group structure, caused by weekly regroupings, on behaviour and frequency of injuries in young horses. Forty-five horses were included in the study and were randomly assigned to the treatments; Stable (S; seven groups of three horses) or Unstable (U; eight groups of three horses). The experimental period lasted 7 weeks, during which horses in Stable groups remained in the same group, whereas one horse was exchanged between Unstable groups every week. The groups were kept in 80m×80m grass-covered enclosures and were fed additional roughage on the ground daily. Social interactions were recorded in Unstable groups immediately after each regrouping (30min), and in both Stable and Unstable groups on day 1, 3 and 6 after each regrouping (2×20min/group/day). Injuries were scored by the end of the experimental period. The level of aggression shown by horses in Unstable groups immediately after regrouping was not affected by week (F5,35=0.42, P=0.83), indicating that horses neither habituated, nor sensitized, to repeated regrouping. Compared to horses in Stable groups, more agonistic behaviour was shown by horses in Unstable groups (i.e. non-contact agonistic; F1,65=5.60, P=0.02), whereas there was no treatment effect on other variables. The level of play behaviour appeared, however, to be more variable in Unstable groups. There was a significant effect of week on the level of contact agonistic interactions as well as greeting behaviour, due to a high occurrence in weeks 4-6. Non-contact agonistic interactions constituted the major part of agonistic interactions (66%). Possibly as consequence, no serious injuries were registered and there was no treatment effect (U=184; P=0.11). We conclude that the behaviour of young horses is affected by group management, and that horses appear not to adapt to weekly regroupings.
|
|
|
|
Keeling, L. J., Bøe, K. E., Christensen, J. W., Hyyppä, S., Jansson, H., Jørgensen, G. H. M., et al. Injury incidence, reactivity and ease of handling of horses kept in groups: a matched case control study in four Nordic countries. Appl Anim Behav Sci, .
Abstract: Abstract There is increasing interest in keeping horses in groups, but progress is hampered by a lack of knowledge about which horses can and should be kept together. Therefore, our objective was to investigate the effect of group composition on the occurrence of injuries among horses, the ease of removing horses from groups and horses’ reactivity to a fearful stimulus. Using a matched case control design, 61 groups of horses were studied in Denmark, Norway, Finland and Sweden. They were allocated into groups of similar or different age and sex or where membership changed regularly or remained stable. Injuries were recorded before mixing the horses into treatment groups, the day after mixing and four weeks later. Reactivity of horses to a moving novel object and the behaviour of a horse being removed from its group and the reactions of other group members towards this horse and the handler were evaluated. It was hypothesized that a more socially variable group composition has beneficial effects on behaviour, ease of handling and reducing reactivity whereas frequent changes in group composition has negative consequences, resulting in more injuries. We found that differences in treatment effects were mainly related to breed, rather than group composition. Icelandic horses reacted less to the movement of the novel object (P = 0.007) and approached it more afterwards (P = 0.04). They also had fewer new injuries than warmbloods following mixing (P < 0.001) and fewer than all other groups 4 weeks later (P < 0.01). Most new injuries after mixing were minor and recorded on the horse’s head, chest, hind legs and rump. In conclusion, variations in sex and age composition of the group had little effect on injury level, reactivity and ease of handling compared to the general effect of breed. Concerns about the risk of severe injuries associated with keeping horses in groups are probably overestimated. Thus, we propose that horses can be successfully kept in groups of different sex and age composition.
|
|
|
|
Hartmann, E., Søndergaard, E., & Keeling, L. J. (2012). Identifying potential risk situations for humans when removing horses from groups. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 136(1), 37–43.
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.
|
|
|
|
Hartmann, E., Søndergaard, E., & Keeling, L. J. Keeping horses in groups: A review. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., .
Abstract: Although husbandry conditions for horses have improved over the last decades, many horses are still kept singly with limited or no physical contact to other horses. This is surprising, given the fact that keeping horses in groups is recognised best to fulfil their physical and behavioural needs, especially their need for social contact with conspecifics, as well as to have a beneficial effect on horse–human interactions during training. Group housing of farm animals is widely applied in practice. As a consequence, scientists have investigated numerous aspects of group housing to help further improve animal welfare and human–animal interactions under these conditions. However, compared to this literature available in farm animals, and the plentiful studies conducted of feral horse populations, there is much less done when it comes to the management of horses kept in groups in the domestic environment. In particular, limited scientific information is available into the effect of group size and group composition on behaviour and methods of introducing new horses into established groups, even though problems related to social integration are repeatedly taken as arguments against keeping horses in groups. This review, therefore, aims to provide an overview of the current scientific knowledge regarding keeping horses in groups. Furthermore, it aims to give insight into whether or not some of the concerns related to keeping horses in groups are justified and to review scientifically based solutions that could be useful in practice to improve horse welfare and human safety.
|
|
|
|
Søndergaard, E., Jensen, M. B., & Nicol, C. J. (2011). Motivation for social contact in horses measured by operant conditioning. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 132(3-4), 131–137.
Abstract: Although horses are social animals they are often housed individually with limited social contact to other horses and this may compromise their welfare. The present study included eight young female horses and investigated the strength of motivation for access to full social contact, head contact and muzzle contact, respectively, to a familiar companion horse. Horses were housed individually next to their companion horse and separations between pens prevented physical contact. During daily test sessions horses were brought to a test area where they could access an arena allowing social contact. Arena access during 3 min was given after completion of a predetermined number of responses on a panel. Fixed ratios (FR) of 8, 16, 24, 32 and 40 responses per arena access were applied in a random order, one per daily test session, within each test week (Monday to Friday), and the number of rewards per daily test session was recorded. All horses could access all three types of social contact in a cross-over design, and an empty arena was used as control. Motivational strength was assessed using elasticity of demand functions, which were estimated based on the number of rewards earned and FR. Elasticities of demand for the three types of social contact were low (-0.20), and not significantly different, although increasing FR still resulted in a decrease in rewards obtained for all three types of social contact (P < 0.001). Across FR-levels horses earned more rewards for social contact than for an empty arena, as shown by much higher intercept values (2.51 vs. 0.99; P < 0.001). However, the elasticity of demand for infrequent access to an empty arena (-0.08) was lower than for social contact (P < 0.01) and not significantly different from zero (P = 0.07). Horses performed more social behaviour the lesser the restriction on social contact (full > head > muzzle). However, the finding that horses showed a similar and high motivation for all three types of social contact suggests that they are valued equally highly in a situation where the alternative is no social contact.
|
|
|
|
Søndergaard, E., Jensen, M. B., & Nicol, C. J. (). Motivation for social contact in horses measured by operant conditioning. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., In Press, Corrected Proof.
Abstract: Although horses are social animals they are often housed individually with limited social contact to other horses and this may compromise their welfare. The present study included eight young female horses and investigated the strength of motivation for access to full social contact, head contact and muzzle contact, respectively, to a familiar companion horse. Horses were housed individually next to their companion horse and separations between pens prevented physical contact. During daily test sessions horses were brought to a test area where they could access an arena allowing social contact. Arena access during 3 min was given after completion of a predetermined number of responses on a panel. Fixed ratios (FR) of 8, 16, 24, 32 and 40 responses per arena access were applied in a random order, one per daily test session, within each test week (Monday to Friday), and the number of rewards per daily test session was recorded. All horses could access all three types of social contact in a cross-over design, and an empty arena was used as control. Motivational strength was assessed using elasticity of demand functions, which were estimated based on the number of rewards earned and FR. Elasticities of demand for the three types of social contact were low (-0.20), and not significantly different, although increasing FR still resulted in a decrease in rewards obtained for all three types of social contact (P < 0.001). Across FR-levels horses earned more rewards for social contact than for an empty arena, as shown by much higher intercept values (2.51 vs. 0.99; P < 0.001). However, the elasticity of demand for infrequent access to an empty arena (-0.08) was lower than for social contact (P < 0.01) and not significantly different from zero (P = 0.07). Horses performed more social behaviour the lesser the restriction on social contact (full > head > muzzle). However, the finding that horses showed a similar and high motivation for all three types of social contact suggests that they are valued equally highly in a situation where the alternative is no social contact.
|
|
|
|
Jørgensen, G. H. M., Borsheim, L., Mejdell, C. M., Søndergaard, E., & Bøe, K. E. (2009). Grouping horses according to gender--Effects on aggression, spacing and injuries. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 120(1-2), 94–99.
Abstract: Many horse owners tend to group horses according to gender, in an attempt to reduce aggressive interactions and the risk of injuries. The aim of our experiment was to test the effects of such gender separation on injuries, social interactions and individual distance in domestic horses. A total of 66 horses were recruited from 4 different farms in Norway and Denmark and divided into six batches. Within each batch, horses were allotted into one mare group, one gelding group and one mixed gender group, with most groups consisting of three or four animals. After 4-6 weeks of acclimatisation, a trained observer recorded all social interactions using direct, continuous observation 1 h in the morning and 1 h in the afternoon for three consecutive days. Recordings of the nearest neighbour of each horse were performed using instantaneous sampling every 10 min. The horses were inspected for injuries before grouping, day 1 after grouping and after 4-6 weeks. No significant effect of gender composition was found on social interactions (P > 0.05), spacing (P > 0.07) or injuries (P > 0.23). Eighty percent of all aggressive interactions recorded were threats, not involving physical contact. Horses with the smallest space allowance showed the highest mean number of aggressive interactions (28.6 ± 6.1 interactions per 6 h) compared to the mean of all the other batches (8.3 ± 1.0 interactions per 6 h). Very few injuries were found and most were superficial. In conclusion, gender composition does not seem to have any effect on aggression level, spacing or injuries. However, the early social experience of horses, management of feeding and space allowance probably represents more important factors for successful group housing of domestic horses.
|
|
|
|
Søndergaard, E., & Turner, K. C. (2008). Timeframe for a novel horse to become familiar in a group. In IESM 2008.
Abstract: The case of familiarity in equine husbandry is not a topic that has suffered vast amounts of examination. During their lifetime domestic horses will most likely experience multiple changes in their social environment such as being sold, moved, and sent to training amongst other things. In recent years a considerable amount of studies have shown the benefits of group-housing on horses, and familiarity timeframes are of genuine importance in management of such systems.
It is our intension to determine the timeframe a novel horse faces before it is recognized as being familiar in an already established group, what factors are of importance and the level of injuries sustained in the introduction period.
24 2-year old Danish Warmblood fillies were used for this study in two blocks of 12 horses. The familiar horses, titled the K-group, consisted of 16 horses and the U-group, the unfamiliar horses, of 8. The horses came from different studs to ensure no prior contact between the two groups of test animals. They were all raised in stable group-housing systems and thereby accustomed to social interactions between conspecifics.
Prior to pairing the K-horses up, nearest-neighbour observations was performed in the holding paddock to ensure the two horses were in fact familiar and would act as an established group.
8 groups of 3 individuals, 2 familiar and 1 unfamiliar, were held in separate paddocks measuring 80x80m. The horses were within eyesight of the other groups but were not able to have any physical contact.
Behavioural observations were performed for 20 minutes per group upon letting the U-horse enter, and then for one hour per group (3x20mins) every Monday, Wednesday and Friday the following 16 days. On day 0, 1, 2, 4, 8 and 16 they were tested for individual preference within the group, and on test day 1 and 16 any injuries sustained were also noted. Dominance rank within the groups was determined by a group-feeding test on the last day of observation.
Preliminary results from the first block indicate an overall timeframe of 6-7 days for familiarity to develop, established by observational data such as fading of greeting behaviour and decrease in distance between the three horses in the respective groups. It was also indicated that aggression between horses in the groups is not determined by familiarity but by dominance rank.
Results from the full experiment will be presented.
|
|
