|
McGreevy, P. D., & Thomson, P. C. (2006). Differences in motor laterality between breeds of performance horse. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 99(1-2), 183–190.
Abstract: This study examined the relationship between motor laterality in horses bred for different types of work and therefore different temperaments. Foreleg preference during grazing was measured in three populations of domestic horse, Thoroughbreds (TB, bred to race at the gallop), Standardbreds (SB, bred for pacing) and Quarter Horses (QH, in this case bred for so-called “cutting work” which involves manoeuvring individual cattle in and out of herds). With a one-sample t-test, TBs showed strong evidence of a left preference in motor laterality (P = 0.000), as did SBs (P = 0.002) but there was no convincing evidence for laterality in QH (P = 0.117). However, the increasing trend in left preference from QH to SBs then TBs was associated with increasing differences between individual horses within a breed. The overall preference (either left or right) increased with age (P = 0.008) and the rate of increase varied with breeds. The presence of a higher proportion of left-foreleg preferent individuals in TBs and SBs compared with QH may indicate that their training or selection (or both) has an effect on motor bias.
|
|
|
McGreevy, P. D., Oddie, C., Burton, F. L., & McLean, A. N. (2009). The horse–human dyad: Can we align horse training and handling activities with the equid social ethogram? Special Issue: Equitation Science, 181(1), 12–18.
Abstract: This article examines the recently completed equid ethogram and shows how analogues of social interactions between horses may occur in various human–horse interactions. It discusses how some specific horse–horse interactions have a corresponding horse–human interaction – some of which may be directly beneficial for the horse while others may be unusual or even abnormal. It also shows how correspondent behaviours sometimes become inappropriate because of their duration, consistency or context. One analogue is unlikely to hold true for all horse–human contexts, so when applying any model from horse–horse interactions to human–horse interactions, the limitations of the model may eclipse the intended outcome of the intervention. These limitations are especially likely when the horse is being ridden. Such analyses may help to determine the validity of extrapolating intra-specific interactions to the inter-specific setting, as is advocated by some popular horse-training methods, and highlight the subsequent limitations where humans play the role of the ‘alpha mare’ or leader in horse handling and training. This examination provides a constructive framework for further informed debate and empirical investigation of the critical features of successful intra-specific interactions.
|
|
|
Meek, P. D., Ballard, G. - A., & Fleming, P. J. S. (2015). The pitfalls of wildlife camera trapping as a survey tool in Australia. Aust. Mammal., 37(1), 13–22.
Abstract: Camera trapping is a relatively new addition to the wildlife survey repertoire in Australia. Its rapid adoption has been unparalleled in ecological science, but objective evaluation of camera traps and their application has not kept pace. With the aim of motivating practitioners to think more about selection and deployment of camera trap models in relation to research goals, we reviewed Australian camera trapping studies to determine how camera traps have been used and how their technological constraints may have affected reported results and conclusions. In the 54 camera trapping articles published between 1991 and 2013, mammals (86%) were studied more than birds (10%) and reptiles (3%), with small to medium-sized mammals being most studied. Australian camera trapping studies, like those elsewhere, have changed from more qualitative to more complex quantitative investigations. However, we found that camera trap constraints and limitations were rarely acknowledged, and we identified eight key issues requiring consideration and further research. These are: camera model, camera detection system, camera placement and orientation, triggering and recovery, camera trap settings, temperature differentials, species identification and behavioural responses of the animals to the cameras. In particular, alterations to animal behaviour by camera traps potentially have enormous influence on data quality, reliability and interpretation. The key issues were not considered in most Australian camera trap papers and require further study to better understand the factors that influence the analysis and interpretation of camera trap data and improve experimental design.
|
|
|
Mejdell, C. M., Buvik, T., Jørgensen, G. H. M., & Bøe, K. E. (2016). Horses can learn to use symbols to communicate their preferences. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 184, 66–73.
Abstract: Abstract This paper describes a method in which horses learn to communicate by touching different neutral visual symbols, in order to tell the handler whether they want to have a blanket on or not. Horses were trained for 10–15 min per day, following a training program comprising ten steps in a strategic order. Reward based operant conditioning was used to teach horses to approach and touch a board, and to understand the meaning of three different symbols. Heat and cold challenges were performed to help learning and to check level of understanding. At certain stages, a learning criterion of correct responses for 8–14 successive trials had to be achieved before proceeding. After introducing the free choice situation, on average at training day 11, the horse could choose between a “no change” symbol and the symbol for either “blanket on” or “blanket off” depending on whether the horse already wore a blanket or not. A cut off point for performance or non-performance was set to day 14, and 23/23 horses successfully learned the task within this limit. Horses of warm-blood type needed fewer training days to reach criterion than cold-bloods (P < 0.05). Horses were then tested under differing weather conditions. Results show that choices made, i.e. the symbol touched, was not random but dependent on weather. Horses chose to stay without a blanket in nice weather, and they chose to have a blanket on when the weather was wet, windy and cold (χ2 = 36.67, P < 0.005). This indicates that horses both had an understanding of the consequence of their choice on own thermal comfort, and that they successfully had learned to communicate their preference by using the symbols. The method represents a novel tool for studying preferences in horses.
|
|
|
Mejdell, C. M., Buvik, T., Jørgensen, G. H. M., & Bøe, K. E. (2016). Horses can learn to use symbols to communicate their preferences. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 184, 66–73.
Abstract: This paper describes a method in which horses learn to communicate by touching different neutral visual symbols, in order to tell the handler whether they want to have a blanket on or not. Horses were trained for 10-15min per day, following a training program comprising ten steps in a strategic order. Reward based operant conditioning was used to teach horses to approach and touch a board, and to understand the meaning of three different symbols. Heat and cold challenges were performed to help learning and to check level of understanding. At certain stages, a learning criterion of correct responses for 8-14 successive trials had to be achieved before proceeding. After introducing the free choice situation, on average at training day 11, the horse could choose between a “no change” symbol and the symbol for either “blanket on” or “blanket off” depending on whether the horse already wore a blanket or not. A cut off point for performance or non-performance was set to day 14, and 23/23 horses successfully learned the task within this limit. Horses of warm-blood type needed fewer training days to reach criterion than cold-bloods (P<0.05). Horses were then tested under differing weather conditions. Results show that choices made, i.e. the symbol touched, was not random but dependent on weather. Horses chose to stay without a blanket in nice weather, and they chose to have a blanket on when the weather was wet, windy and cold (χ2=36.67, P<0.005). This indicates that horses both had an understanding of the consequence of their choice on own thermal comfort, and that they successfully had learned to communicate their preference by using the symbols. The method represents a novel tool for studying preferences in horses.
|
|
|
Mejdell, C. M., Buvik, T., Jørgensen, G. H. M., & Bøe, K. E. (2016). Horses can learn to use symbols to communicate their preferences. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 184, 66–73.
Abstract: This paper describes a method in which horses learn to communicate by touching different neutral visual symbols, in order to tell the handler whether they want to have a blanket on or not. Horses were trained for 10-15min per day, following a training program comprising ten steps in a strategic order. Reward based operant conditioning was used to teach horses to approach and touch a board, and to understand the meaning of three different symbols. Heat and cold challenges were performed to help learning and to check level of understanding. At certain stages, a learning criterion of correct responses for 8-14 successive trials had to be achieved before proceeding. After introducing the free choice situation, on average at training day 11, the horse could choose between a “no change” symbol and the symbol for either “blanket on” or “blanket off” depending on whether the horse already wore a blanket or not. A cut off point for performance or non-performance was set to day 14, and 23/23 horses successfully learned the task within this limit. Horses of warm-blood type needed fewer training days to reach criterion than cold-bloods (P<0.05). Horses were then tested under differing weather conditions. Results show that choices made, i.e. the symbol touched, was not random but dependent on weather. Horses chose to stay without a blanket in nice weather, and they chose to have a blanket on when the weather was wet, windy and cold (χ2=36.67, P<0.005). This indicates that horses both had an understanding of the consequence of their choice on own thermal comfort, and that they successfully had learned to communicate their preference by using the symbols. The method represents a novel tool for studying preferences in horses.
|
|
|
Morton, F. B., Lee, P. C., & Buchanan-Smith, H. M. (2013). Taking personality selection bias seriously in animal cognition research: a case study in capuchin monkeys (Sapajus apella). Animal Cognition, 16(4), 677–684.
Abstract: In most experimental work on animal cognition, researchers attempt to control for multiple interacting variables by training subjects prior to testing, allowing subjects to participate voluntarily, and providing subjects with food rewards. However, do such methods encourage selection bias from subjects’ personalities? In this study, we trained eighteen zoo-housed capuchin monkeys (Sapajus apella) for two experiments, under conditions of positive reinforcement (i.e. food rewards) and free-choice participation. Using a combination of behavioral and rater-based methods, we identified and validated five personality dimensions in these capuchins (Assertiveness, Openness, Neuroticism, Sociability, and Attentiveness). Scores on Openness were positively related to individual differences in monkey task participation, reflecting previous work showing that such individuals are often more active, curious, and willing to engage in testing. We also found a negative relationship between scores on Assertiveness and performance on tasks, which may reflect the trade-offs between speed and accuracy in these animals’ decision-making. Highly Assertive individuals (the most sociable within monkey groups) may also prioritize social interactions over engaging in research. Lastly, monkeys that consistently participated and performed well on both tasks showed significantly higher Openness and lower Assertiveness compared to others, mirroring relationships found between personality, participation, and performance among all participants. Participation and performance during training was clearly biased toward individuals with particular personalities (i.e. high Openness, low Assertiveness). Results are discussed in light of the need for careful interpretation of comparative data on animal cognition and the need for researchers to take personality selection bias more seriously.
Animal Cognition Animal Cognition Look
Inside
|
|
|
Nagy, K., Bodó, G., Bárdos, G., Bánszky, N., & Kabai, P. (2010). Differences in temperament traits between crib-biting and control horses. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 122(1), 41–47.
Abstract: Recent studies have suggested that crib-biting in horses is associated with diminished capacity of learning or coping with stress. Such findings raise the question whether trainability, which is fundamentally important in practice, could also be affected by stereotypic behaviour. Trainability of a horse is difficult to assess in simple tests, however, it is reliably estimated by experienced riders. To assess trainability and other characteristics related to that, a questionnaire survey was conducted with the owners of 50 crib-biting and 50 control horses. Where possible, control horses were selected from the same establishment as crib-biters. Groups did not differ significantly regarding age, breed, gender, training level or usage. Principal component analysis revealed three main factors which can be labelled as [`]Anxiety', [`]Affability' and [`]Trainability'. The [`]Anxiety' factor consisted of the items [`]Nervousness', [`]Excitability', [`]Panic', [`]Inconsistent emotionality', [`]Vigilance', [`]Skittishness', and [`]Timidity'. [`]Affability' consisted of [`]Friendliness toward people', [`]Cooperation', [`]Docility' and [`]Friendliness toward horses'. [`]Trainability' involved [`]Concentration', [`]Trainability', [`]Memory', and [`]Perseverance'. Temperament traits were not affected by age, gender, breed or training level, but the usage of the horse and the presence of crib-biting behaviour had significant effects. Competition horses had lower level of [`]Anxiety' (p = 0.032) and higher level of [`]Trainability' (p = 0.068) than leisure horses. Crib-biting horses had significantly lower level of [`]Anxiety' than control horses (p < 0.001), while [`]Trainability' and [`]Affability' did not differ between groups (p = 0.823 and p = 0.543, respectively). Competition horses are more often exposed to novel environment and to frightening stimuli (e.g. colourful obstacles) than leisure horses and therefore might have also become more habituated to these types of stimuli. Coping with novel situation may be enhanced by defusing nervous behaviour by the more experienced riders of competition. Previous studies indicated crib-biting horses to be less reactive when challenged as compared to control horses. We suggest that the virtual calmness and lower nervousness of the crib-biting horses might be due to the passive coping style of these animals. [`]Affability' of horses might be more related to housing and management conditions than to crib-biting. Contrary to expectations, scores on [`]Trainability' had not coincided with the impaired learning of crib-biting horses reported in laboratory tests. However, previous behavioural tests on equine learning rarely had a direct relevance to the training abilities of the horses. Our results do not support crib-biting stereotypy to affect performance in training, which is a complex learning process involving cooperation and docility in the social environment.
|
|
|
Neveu, P. J. (1993). Brain Lateralization and Immunomodulation. Int J Neurosci, 70(1-2), 135–143.
Abstract: The two sides of the brain may be differently involved in the modulation of immune responses as demonstrated by lesional and behavioral approaches in rodents. Lesions of right or left neocortex induced opposite effects on various immune parameters including mitogen-induced lymphoproliferation, interleukin-2 production, macrophage activation or natural killer cell activity. This animal model, useful to elucidate whereby the brain and the immune system can communicate, appears to be suitable for studying the immune perturbations observed during stroke in humans. Brain asymmetry in modulation of immune reactivity may also be demonstrated in intact animal using a behavioral paradigm. The direction of a lateralized motor behavior ie paw preference in a food reaching task, correlated with an asymmetrical brain organization, was shown to be associated with lymphocyte reactivity, natural killer cell activity and auto-antibody production. The association between paw preference and immune reactivity in mice varies according to the immune parameters tested and is a sex-dependent phenomenon in which genetic background may be involved. The experimental models for investigating asymmetrical brain modulation of the immune system should be useful for studying several physiological, pathological and genetic aspects of neuroimmunomodulation.
|
|
|
Nicol, C. J. (2002). Equine learning: progress and suggestions for future research. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 78(2-4), 193–208.
Abstract: Horses are well able to form classical and instrumental associations and so the focus of much recent research has been on the stimulus control of instrumental learning. Horses appear to discriminate using spatial cues more easily than other stimulus features, as indicated both by the speed of initial task acquisition and by the extent to which acquired discriminations can be reversed. Phenomena associated with discrimination learning in laboratory animals, including generalisation and peak shift, have been demonstrated in horses. However, the ability of horses to classify stimuli into categories is more controversial. Although there is some evidence that horses may be able to form categories based on similarities in the physical appearance of different stimuli, there is currently no evidence that they are able to develop abstract concepts. Their performance on social learning tasks has also been poor. Few correlations are observed between the learning ability of individual horses on different tasks, suggesting that it may not be possible to classify individual horses as `good' or `poor' learners. Better learning performance by horses that are naturally calm is probably due to reduced interference in the learning process. Correct handling procedures can lower reactivity levels in horses, and may facilitate learning in some circumstances. Future research on equine learning needs to take into account the complex nature of equine social interaction. Studies on the effects of stress on learning, and on social and spatial cognition, are also particularly needed.
|
|