|
|
Lema, F. J., Ribeiro, S., & Palacios, V. (2022). Observations of wolves hunting fee-ranging horses in Iberia. CDPNews, 24, 1–9.
|
|
|
|
Leliveld, L. M. C., Düpjan, S., Tuchscherer, A., & Puppe, B. (2020). Hemispheric Specialization for Processing the Communicative and Emotional Content of Vocal Communication in a Social Mammal, the Domestic Pig. Front. Behav. Neurosci., 14, 596758.
Abstract: In humans, speech perception is lateralized, with the left hemisphere of the brain dominant in processing the communicative content and the right hemisphere dominant in processing the emotional content. However, still little is known about such a division of tasks in other species. We therefore investigated lateralized processing of communicative and emotionally relevant calls in a social mammal, the pig (Sus scrofa). Based on the contralateral connection between ears and hemispheres, we compared the behavioural and cardiac responses of 36 young male pigs during binaural and monaural (left or right) playback to the same sounds. The playback stimuli were calls of social isolation and physical restraint, whose communicative and emotional relevance, respectively, were validated prior to the test by acoustic analyses and during binaural playbacks. There were indications of lateralized processing mainly in the initial detection (left head-turn bias, indicating right hemispheric dominance) of the more emotionally relevant restraint calls. Conversely, there were indications of lateralized processing only in the appraisal (increased attention during playback to the right ear) of the more communicative relevant isolation calls. This implies differential involvement of the hemispheres in the auditory processing of vocalizations in pigs and thereby hints at similarities in the auditory processing of vocal communication in non-human animals and speech in humans. Therefore, these findings provide interesting new insight in the evolution of human language and auditory lateralization.
|
|
|
|
Leliveld, L. M. C. (2019). From Science to Practice: A Review of Laterality Research on Ungulate Livestock. Symmetry, 11(9), 1157.
Abstract: In functional laterality research, most ungulate livestock species have until recently been mainly overlooked. However, there are many scientific and practical benefits of studying laterality in ungulate livestock. As social, precocial and domestic species, they may offer insight into the mechanisms involved in the ontogeny and phylogeny of functional laterality and help to better understand the role of laterality in animal welfare. Until now, most studies on ungulate livestock have focused on motor laterality, but interest in other lateralized functions, e.g., cognition and emotions, is growing. Increasingly more studies are also focused on associations with age, sex, personality, health, stress, production and performance. Although the full potential of research on laterality in ungulate livestock is not yet exploited, findings have already shed new light on central issues in cognitive and emotional processing and laid the basis for potentially useful applications in future practice, e.g., stress reduction during human-animal interactions and improved assessments of health, production and welfare. Future research would benefit from further integration of basic laterality methodology (e.g., testing for individual preferences) and applied ethological approaches (e.g., established emotionality tests), which would not only improve our understanding of functional laterality but also benefit the assessment of animal welfare.
|
|
|
|
Lee, P. C., & de Antonio, C. A. (2015). Necessity, unpredictability and opportunity: An exploration of ecological and social drivers of behavioral innovation. Animal Creativity and Innovation, , 317–333.
|
|
|
|
Lee, P. C. (2003). Innovation as a behavioural response to environmental challenges. In S. M. Reader and K. N. Laland (Ed.), Animal Innovation (pp. 261–279). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
|
|
|
Lee, P. (1991). Adaptation to environmental change:an evolutionary perspective. In H. O. Box (Ed.), Primate responses to environmental changes (pp. 39–56). London: Chapmann & Hall.
|
|
|
|
Lansade, L., Colson, V., Parias, C., Trösch, M., Reigner, F., & Calandreau, L. (2020). Female horses spontaneously identify a photograph of their keeper, last seen six months previously. Scientific Reports, 10(1), 6302.
Abstract: Horses are capable of identifying individual conspecifics based on olfactory, auditory or visual cues. However, this raises the questions of their ability to recognize human beings and on the basis of what cues. This study investigated whether horses could differentiate between a familiar and unfamiliar human from photographs of faces. Eleven horses were trained on a discrimination task using a computer-controlled screen, on which two photographs were presented simultaneously (32 trials/session): touching one was rewarded (S+) and the other not (S-). In the training phase, the S+ faces were of four unfamiliar people which gradually became familiar over the trials. The S- faces were novel for each trial. After the training phase, the faces of the horses' keepers were presented opposite novel faces to test whether the horses could identify the former spontaneously. A reward was given whichever face was touched to avoid any possible learning effect. Horses touched the faces of keepers significantly more than chance, whether it was their current keeper or one they had not seen for six months (t = 3.65; p < 0.004 and t = 6.24; p < 0.0001). Overall, these results show that horses have advanced human face-recognition abilities and a long-term memory of those human faces.
|
|
|
|
Langbein, J., Siebert, K., & Nuernberg, G. (2008). Concurrent recall of serially learned visual discrimination problems in dwarf goats (Capra hircus). Behav Proc, 79.
|
|
|
|
Laland, K. N., & van Bergen, Y. (2003). Experimental studies of innovation in the guppy. Animal Innovation, , 155–174.
|
|
|
|
Lagos, L., & Blanco, P. (2021). Testing the use of dogs to prevent wolf attackson free ranging ponies in Iberia? CDPnews, 23, 20–27.
|
|
