|
Hazem, A. S. (1978). [Collective review: Salmonella paratyphi in animals and in the environment]. Dtsch Tierarztl Wochenschr, 85(7), 296–303.
|
|
Hendricks, J. C., & Morrison, A. R. (1981). Normal and abnormal sleep in mammals. J Am Vet Med Assoc, 178(2), 121–126.
|
|
Hoogstraal, H., & Mitchell, R. M. (1971). Haemaphysalis (Alloceraea) aponommoides Warburton (Ixodoidea: Ixodidae), description of immature stages, hosts, distribution, and ecology in India, Nepal, Sikkim, and China. J Parasitol, 57(3), 635–645.
|
Horn, L., Range, F., & Huber, L. (2013). Dogs’ attention towards humans depends on their relationship, not only on social familiarity. Animal Cognition, 16(3), 435–443.
Abstract: Both in humans and non-human animals, it has been shown that individuals attend more to those they have previously interacted with and/or they are more closely associated with than to unfamiliar individuals. Whether this preference is mediated by mere social familiarity based on exposure or by the specific relationship between the two individuals, however, remains unclear. The domestic dog is an interesting subject in this line of research as it lives in the human environment and regularly interacts with numerous humans, yet it often has a particularly close relationship with its owner. Therefore, we investigated how long dogs (Canis familiaris) would attend to the actions of two familiar humans and one unfamiliar experimenter, while varying whether dogs had a close relationship with only one or both familiar humans. Our data provide evidence that social familiarity by itself cannot account for dogs’ increased attention towards their owners since they only attended more to those familiar humans with whom they also had a close relationship.
|
Houpt, K. A. (1976). Animal behavior as a subject for veterinary students. Cornell Vet, 66(1), 73–81.
Abstract: Knowledge of animal behavior is an important asset for the veterinarian; therefore a course in veterinary animal behavior is offered at the New York State College of Veterinary Medicine as an elective. The course emphasizes the behavior of those species of most interest to the practicing veterinarian: cats, dogs, horses, cows, pigs and sheep. Dominance heirarchies, animal communication, aggressive behavior, sexual behavior and maternal behavior are discussed. Play, learning, diurnal cycles of activity and sleep, and controls of ingestive behavior are also considered. Exotic and zoo animal behaviors are also presented by experts in these fields. The critical periods of canine development are related to the optimum management of puppies. The behavior of feral dogs and horses is described. The role of the veterinarian in preventing cruelty to animals and recognition of pain in animals is emphasized. Whenever possible behavior is observed in the laboratory or on film.
|
|
Iwuala, M. O., & Okpala, I. (1978). Studies on the ectoparasitic fauna of Nigerian livestock I: Types and distribution patterns on hosts'. Bull Anim Health Prod Afr, 26(4), 339–350.
|
|
Iwuala, M. O., & Okpala, I. (1978). Studies on the ectoparasitic fauna of Nigerian livestock II: Seasonal infestation rates. Bull Anim Health Prod Afr, 26(4), 351–359.
|
|
Jordan, J. (1970). [Modern views on the structure and function of the vomeronasal (Jacobson's) organ in mammals]. Otolaryngol Pol, 24(4), 457–462.
|
Kaminski, J., Pitsch, A., & Tomasello, M. (2013). Dogs steal in the dark. Animal Cognition, 16(3), 385–394.
Abstract: All current evidence of visual perspective taking in dogs can possibly be explained by dogs reacting to certain stimuli rather than understanding what others see. In the current study, we set up a situation in which contextual information and social cues are in conflict. A human always forbade the dog from taking a piece of food. The part of the room being illuminated was then varied, for example, either the area where the human was seated or the area where the food was located was lit. Results show that dogs steal significantly more food when it is dark compared to when it is light. While stealing forbidden food the dog’s behaviour also depends on the type of illumination in the room. Illumination around the food, but not the human, affected the dogs’ behaviour. This indicates that dogs do not take the sight of the human as a signal to avoid the food. It also cannot be explained by a low-level associative rule of avoiding illuminated food which dogs actually approach faster when they are in private. The current finding therefore raises the possibility that dogs take into account the human’s visual access to the food while making their decision to steal it.
|
Kotrschal, K., Schöberl, I., Bauer, B., Thibeaut, A. - M., & Wedl, M. (2009). Dyadic relationships and operational performance of male and female owners and their male dogs. Behav. Process., 81(3), 383–391.
Abstract: In the paper we investigate how owner personality, attitude and gender influence dog behavior, dyadic practical functionality and the level of dog salivary cortisol. In three meetings, 12 female and 10 male owners of male dogs answered questionnaires including the Neo-FFI human personality inventory. Their dyadic behavior was video-taped in a number of test situations, and saliva samples were collected. Owners who scored highly in neuroticism (Neo-FFI dimension one) viewed their dogs as social supporters and spent much time with them. Their dogs had low baseline cortisol levels, but such dyads were less successful in the operational task. Owners who scored highly in extroversion (Neo-FFI dimension two) appreciated shared activities with their dogs which had relatively high baseline cortisol values. Dogs that had female owners were less sociable-active (dog personality axis 1) than dogs that had male owners. Therefore, it appears that owner gender and personality influences dyadic interaction style, dog behavior and dyadic practical functionality.
|
