Abstract: Ein gutes Tierwohl definiert sich nicht nur durch die Abwesenheit von Stressindikatoren, sondern auch durch das Vorhandensein von Indikatoren, die auf ein gutes Wohlergehen hinweisen. So können stressbedingte Erkrankungen vermieden werden. Zur Bestimmung des Tierwohls bei Pferden wurde daher untersucht, inwieweit sich die sensorische Lateralität (einseitiger Gebrauch von Sinnesorganen) und die motorische Lateralität (einseitiger Gebrauch von Gliedmaßen) als einfach, schnell und kostengünstig zu erhebende Parameter eignen. Hierzu werden neben aktueller Literatur auch die eigenen Untersuchungsergebnisse zusammenfassend dargestellt. Die nach außen sichtbar werdende sensorische und motorische Lateralität sind das Resultat der cerebralen Lateralisierung. Dies beinhaltet nicht nur die Aufgabenteilung beider Gehirnhälften für ein effizienteres Aufnehmen und Speichern von Informationen, sondern sie steht auch in Verbindung mit der Entstehung und Verarbeitung von Emotionen, die maßgeblich am Wohlergehen eines Lebewesens beteiligt sind. Kurzzeitige Stressoren führen zu einer Erregung, die je nach Erfahrungen mit positiven oder negativen Emotionen in Verbindung steht. Emotionen helfen dem Organismus dabei, zu überleben. Andauernde negative Emotionen durch regelmäßige oder anhaltende negative Ereignisse führen zu Stress und reduzieren die Erwartung positiver Ereignisse (negativer cognitive Bias). Das Tier ist im Wohlergehen beeinträchtigt. Jüngst zeigte insbesondere die Messung der motorischen Lateralität Potenzial als Indikator für lang anhaltenden und chronischen Stress, denn gestresste Pferde, deren Stresshormonlevel stark ansteigt, zeigen einen zunehmenden Gebrauch der linken Gliedmaßen über einen längeren Zeitraum. Weiterhin zeigen erste Messungen einen Zusammenhang zwischen einer linksseitigen motorischen Lateralität und einer reduzierten Erwartung positiver Ereignisse (negativer cognitive Bias). Zusammen mit der sensorischen Lateralität, die in einer akuten Stressphase ebenso eine Linksverschiebung zeigt und somit als Indikator für Kurzzeitstress gilt, kann eine generelle, vermehrte Linksseitigkeit auch einen Hinweis auf erhöhte Emotionalität und Stressanfälligkeit sein. Eine sich steigernde Linksseitigkeit bedeutet eine präferierte Informationsverarbeitung durch die rechte Gehirnhälfte, die beispielsweise reaktives Verhalten, starke Emotionen und Stressantworten steuert. Es stellte sich jedoch heraus, dass wie bei allen Stressindikatoren auch in der Lateralitätsmessung ein Vergleichswert aus einer vorangegangenen Messung notwendig ist, denn nur Veränderungen zum häufiger werdenden Gebrauch der linken Seite können auf Stress bei Pferden hindeuten und die parallele Erhebung weiterer Parameter, wie zum Beispiel das Verhalten oder Stresshormone, können die Aussage der Lateralität bekräftigen.

Abstract: Understanding the neural circuits underlying equine behaviour has the potential to help optimise strategies of husbandry and training. This review discusses two areas of neurophysiological research in a range of species and relates this information to the horse. The first discussion focuses on mechanisms of learning and motivation and assesses how this information can be applied to improve the training of the horse. The second concerns the identification of the equine neurophysiological phenotype, through behavioural and genetic probes, as a way of improving strategies for optimal equine husbandry and training success. The review finishes by identifying directions for future research with an emphasis on how neurophysiological systems (and thus behaviour) can be modified through strategic husbandry. This review highlights how a neurophysioloigical understanding of horse behaviour can play an important role in attaining the primary objectives of equitation science as well as improving the welfare of the horse.

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: We used an opportunistic review of photographs of different adult and juvenile horses walking, trotting, and cantering (n = 828) to compare the angle of the nasal plane relative to vertical in feral and domestic horses at liberty (n = 450) with ridden horses advertised in a popular Australian horse magazine (n = 378). We assumed that horses in advertisements were shown at, what was perceived by the vendors to be, their best. Of the ridden horses, 68% had their nasal plane behind the vertical. The mean angle of the unridden horses at walk, trot, and canter (30.7 ± 11.5; 27.3 ± 12.0; 25.5 ± 11.0) was significantly greater than those of the ridden horses (1.4 ± 14.1; ?5.1 ± ?11.1; 3.1 ± 15.4, P < 0.001). Surprisingly, unridden domestic horses showed greater angles than feral horses or domestic horses at liberty. We compared adult and juvenile horses in all 3 gaits and found no significant difference. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that the longitudinal neck flexion of the degree desirable by popular opinion in ridden horses is not a common feature of unridden horses moving naturally. Moreover, they suggest that advertised horses in our series are generally being ridden at odds with their natural carriage and contrary to the international rules of dressage (as published by the International Equestrian Federation). These findings are discussed against the backdrop of the established doctrine, which states that carrying a rider necessitates changes in longitudinal flexion, and in the context of the current debate around hyperflexion.

Abstract: The millennia-old practices of horse training markedly predate and thus were isolated from the mid-twentieth century revelation of animal learning processes. From this standpoint, the progress made in the application and understanding of learning theory in horse training is reviewed including a discussion of how learning processes are employed or otherwise under-utilised in training. This review describes the process of habituation and the most commonly applied desensitisation techniques (systematic desensitisation, counter-conditioning, overshadowing, response prevention) and propose two additional techniques (approach conditioning and stimulus blending). The salience of different types of cues, the interaction of operant and classical conditioning and the impact of stress are also discussed. This paper also exposes the inflexibility and occasional inadequacy of the terminology of learning theory when translated from the research laboratory situation to the practical setting in horse training. While learning theory provides a rich toolbox for riders and trainers, the training process is subject to the simultaneous use of multiple learning processes. In addition, learning/behavioural outcomes and trained responses are not just the result of simple stimulus-response based interactions but are further shaped by arousal, affective and attachment states. More research is needed in these areas. For the field of equitation science to progress and to improve clarity and use of learning processes, changes in nomenclature are required. In particular, the use of the terms 'positive' and 'negative' as descriptive labels in both reinforcement and punishment modalities are unacceptably misleading for everyday use. These labels inhibit the understanding and recognition of the learning processes that these terms supposedly represent, yet the learning processes they describe are vital for horse riders, handlers and trainers to understand. We therefore propose that these labels should be re-labelled more appropriately as 'addition' or 'subtraction' reinforcement/punishment. This would enlighten trainers on the correct application of learning theory, and safety and welfare benefits for people and horses would follow. Finally it is also proposed that the term 'conflict theory' be taken up in equitation science to facilitate diagnosis of training-related behaviour disorders and thus enable the emergence of improved training practices. The optimal use of learning theory should be established as a fundamental principle in equestrian education.