|
Heydebreck, K. von. (1928). Reitlehrer und Reiter in Uniform und Zivil eine Anleitung nach den Grundsätzen der deutschen Reitvorschrift (2., neubearb. Aufl ed.). Berlin: Mittler.
|
|
Baciadonna, L., McElligott, A. G., & Briefer, E. F. (2013). Goats favour personal over social information in an experimental foraging task. Peer J, 1.
|
Beery, A. K., & Kaufer, D. (2015). Stress, social behavior, and resilience: Insights from rodents. Neurobiol. Stress, 1(Stress Resilience), 116–127.
Abstract: The neurobiology of stress and the neurobiology of social behavior are deeply intertwined. The social environment interacts with stress on almost every front: social interactions can be potent stressors; they can buffer the response to an external stressor; and social behavior often changes in response to stressful life experience. This review explores mechanistic and behavioral links between stress, anxiety, resilience, and social behavior in rodents, with particular attention to different social contexts. We consider variation between several different rodent species and make connections to research on humans and non-human primates.
|
|
Bateson, P. (2014). Play, playfulness, creativity and innovation. Anim. Behav. Cogn., 1(2), 99–112.
|
|
Van Horik, J., & Emery, N. (2011). Evolution of cognition. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci, 2.
|
|
Harrington, F. H. (1989). Chorus howling by wolves: Acoustic structures, pack size and Beau Geste effect. Bioacoustics, 2.
|
|
Bödeker, E. (1908). Maultierzucht und Maultierhaltung (Vol. 3). Hannover: Max Jänecke.
|
Lesimple, C., Sankey, C., Richard, M. - A., & HAUSBERGER, M. (2012). Do Horses Expect Humans to Solve Their Problems? Front. Psychol., 3, 306.
Abstract: Domestic animals are highly capable of detecting human cues, while wild relatives tend to perform less well (e.g. responding to pointing gestures). It is suggested that domestication may have led to the development of such cognitive skills. Here, we hypothesized that because domestic animals are so attentive and dependant to humans' actions for resources, the counter effect may be a decline of self sufficiency, such as individual task solving. Here we show a negative correlation between the performance in a learning task (opening a chest) and the interest shown by horses towards humans, despite high motivation expressed by investigative behaviours directed at the chest. If human-directed attention reflects the development of particular skills in domestic animals, this is to our knowledge the first study highlighting a link between human-directed behaviours and impaired individual solving task skills (ability to solve a task by themselves) in horses.
|
Murphy, M. A., Waits, L. P., Kendall, K. C., Wasser, S. K., Higbee, J. A., & Bogden, R. (2002). An evaluation of long-term preservation methods for brown bear (Ursus arctos) faecal DNA samples. Conservat. Genet., 3(4), 435–440.
Abstract: Relatively few large-scale faecal DNA studieshave been initiated due to difficulties inamplifying low quality and quantity DNAtemplate. To improve brown bear faecal DNA PCRamplification success rates and to determinepost collection sample longevity, fivepreservation methods were evaluated: 90%ethanol, DETs buffer, silica-dried, oven-driedstored at room temperature, and oven-driedstored at -20 °C. Preservationeffectiveness was evaluated for 50 faecalsamples by PCR amplification of a mitochondrialDNA (mtDNA) locus (~146 bp) and a nuclear DNA(nDNA) locus (~200 bp) at time points of oneweek, one month, three months and six months. Preservation method and storage timesignificantly impacted mtDNA and nDNAamplification success rates. For mtDNA, allpreservation methods had >= 75% success atone week, but storage time had a significantimpact on the effectiveness of the silicapreservation method. Ethanol preserved sampleshad the highest success rates for both mtDNA(86.5%) and nDNA (84%). Nuclear DNAamplification success rates ranged from 26-88%, and storage time had a significant impacton all methods but ethanol. Preservationmethod and storage time should be importantconsiderations for researchers planningprojects utilizing faecal DNA. We recommendpreservation of faecal samples in 90% ethanolwhen feasible, although when collecting inremote field conditions or for both DNA andhormone assays a dry collection method may beadvantageous.
|
Dwan, K., Altman, D. G., Arnaiz, J. A., Bloom, J., Chan, A. - W., Cronin, E., et al. (2008). Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias. Plos One, 3(8), e3081.
Abstract: Background The increased use of meta-analysis in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions has highlighted several types of bias that can arise during the completion of a randomised controlled trial. Study publication bias has been recognised as a potential threat to the validity of meta-analysis and can make the readily available evidence unreliable for decision making. Until recently, outcome reporting bias has received less attention. Methodology/Principal Findings We review and summarise the evidence from a series of cohort studies that have assessed study publication bias and outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials. Sixteen studies were eligible of which only two followed the cohort all the way through from protocol approval to information regarding publication of outcomes. Eleven of the studies investigated study publication bias and five investigated outcome reporting bias. Three studies have found that statistically significant outcomes had a higher odds of being fully reported compared to non-significant outcomes (range of odds ratios: 2.2 to 4.7). In comparing trial publications to protocols, we found that 40-62% of studies had at least one primary outcome that was changed, introduced, or omitted. We decided not to undertake meta-analysis due to the differences between studies. Conclusions Recent work provides direct empirical evidence for the existence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. There is strong evidence of an association between significant results and publication; studies that report positive or significant results are more likely to be published and outcomes that are statistically significant have higher odds of being fully reported. Publications have been found to be inconsistent with their protocols. Researchers need to be aware of the problems of both types of bias and efforts should be concentrated on improving the reporting of trials.
|
