Abstract: Horses, and in particular sport horses, remain housed predominantly in single stalls. One of the main reported reasons is the fear that they will become agitated and injure themselves and thereby impair their performance if released in paddocks. The hour spent daily at work is also assumed to be sufficient to satisfy the horses' needs for locomotion. Growing scientific evidence shows that single stall housing has negative consequences on horses' welfare and that time for free movement is necessary. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of allowing sport horses used to staying permanently in their stall (except for 1 h riding/day) daily free time in a paddock and to evaluate its potential impact on their welfare using two behavioural reliable indicators (stereotypic behaviours and ear position), as well as selected blood parameters (blood cell count, oxytocin and serotonin concentrations). Two experiments were conducted on the same site. The first experiment evaluated sport horses' habituation to the novel situation of daily sessions in a paddock, and recorded welfare indicators in their stall before and during the experiment, comparing horses that were taken outdoors (experimental) and those that stayed in their stall (control). The second experiment evaluated the impact of this daily free time in a paddock on horses' welfare and its durability, focusing on positive indicators. Behavioural observations in paddocks showed that even horses that had never experienced free movement outside their stall habituated rapidly to this situation. The presence of hay in the paddock, may have speeded up habituation. Their restricted living conditions were associated with abnormalities in blood cell count that were not overcome during the time of daily paddock sessions but behavioural indicators showed that their welfare improved. In the second study, the experimental horses' welfare improved during the paddock release period, in particular their stereotypic behaviours decreased and oxytocin levels increased. No effects on serotonin concentrations could be evidenced. These effects were directly associated with being in paddock, as the indicators returned rapidly to their previous levels indicating compromised welfare when the paddock release sessions stopped. In conclusion, it can be recommended to release sport horses for free movement in paddocks as welfare is improved and subjective assessment by caretakers indicated minimal risks.

Abstract: Theoreticians propose that trained winning and losing are important processes in creating linear animal dominance hierarchies, and experiments have shown that both processes can occur in animals, but their actual roles in creating natural hierarchies are unknown. We described agonism in 18 broods of three blue-footed boobies, Sula nebouxii, a species for which trained winning and losing have been demonstrated, to infer how these processes generate and maintain a natural hierarchy. Ranks in the linear hierarchy that emerged in every brood were initially assigned by asymmetries in age, size and maturity, which led to differences between broodmates in levels of expressed and received aggression and, consequently, to differences in the training of their aggressiveness and submissiveness. Later, ranks appeared to be maintained by the chicks' acquired aggressive and submissive tendencies combined with ongoing effects of persisting differences in size and maturity. Our results suggest that trained winning and trained losing are important in the construction of booby hierarchies but that these two axes of learning are largely independent. Increase in submissiveness occurs over a period of about 10-20 days, and the level of submissiveness reached varies with the amount of aggression received. After training, submissiveness is apparently maintained by a lower level of aggression and increasing use of threats. Threats become increasingly effective as chicks age, but are never as effective as attacks.

Abstract: Both humans and group-living animals associate and behave affiliatively more with some individuals than others. Human friendship has long been acknowledged, and recently scientists studying animal behaviour have started using the term friendship for close social associates in animals. Yet, while biologists describe friends as social tools to enhance fitness, social scientists describe human friendship as unconditional. We investigate whether these different descriptions reflect true differences in human friendship and animal close social associations or are a by-product of different research approaches: namely social scientists focussing on proximate and biologists on ultimate explanations. We first stress the importance of similar measures to determine close social associations, thereafter examine their ultimate benefits and proximate motivations, and discuss the latest findings on the central-neural regulation of social bonds. We conclude that both human friendship and animal close social associations are ultimately beneficial. On the proximate level, motivations for friendship in humans and for close social associations in animals are not necessarily based on benefits and are often unconditional. Moreover, humans share with many animals a similar physiological basis of sociality. Therefore, biologists and social scientist describe the same phenomenon, and the use of the term friendship for animals seems justified.

Abstract: Both white-tailed deer, Odocoileus virginianus, and mule deer, O. hemionus, females defend fawns against coyotes, Canis latrans, but only mule deer defend nonoffspring conspecific and heterospecific fawns. During a predator attack, females may have to decide whether to defend a fawn while having imperfect information on its identity obtained from hearing a few distress calls. Although imperfect recognition can influence altruistic behaviour, few empirical studies have considered this point when testing functional explanations for altruism. We designed a series of playback experiments with fawn distress calls to test alternative hypotheses (by-product of parental care, kin selection, reciprocal altruism) for the mule deer's defence of nonoffspring, specifically allowing for the possibility that females mistake these fawns for their own. White-tailed deer females approached the speaker only when distress calls of white-tailed deer fawns were played and when their own fawn was hidden, suggesting that fawn defence was strictly a matter of parental care in this species. In contrast, mule deer females responded similarly and strongly, regardless of the caller's identity, the female's reproductive state (mother or nonmother) or the presence of their own offspring. The failure of mule deer females to adjust their responses to these conditions suggests that they do not defend nonoffspring because they mistake them for their own fawns. The lack of behavioural discrimination also suggests that kin selection, reciprocal altruism and defence of the offspring's area are unlikely to explain the mule deer's defence of nonoffspring. We identify causal and functional questions that still need to be addressed to understand why mule deer defend fawns so indiscriminately.