Abstract: A study was conducted to determine the relationship between discrimination reversal learning and performance tasks in horses. Ten yearling and seven 2-year-old mares and geldings of Arabian (n = 4), Quarter Horse (n = 9), and Thoroughbred (n = 4) breeding were given a two-choice discrimination task in which either a black or a white bucket contained a food reward for ten trials per day during 19 test days. The spatial position of the buckets was varied on a random schedule. The rewarded bucket color was reversed each time a subject met criterion of eight correct choices per day for 2 consecutive days. Discrimination reversal testing was followed by 6 days of performance tasks: three crossing a wooden bridge and three jumping an obstacle to reach food and conspecifics, within a maximum allotted time of 15 min day-1. Total reversals attained by the horses were low (x = 1.5 +/- 0.9). All subjects did attain at least one reversal, and six had two or more reversals. No differences (P > .05) were detected between ages or sexes, nor among breeds in discrimination reversal learning or performance test measurements. However, there was a trend towards a breed difference (P <= 0.09) in the mean number of correct responses to the first reversal criterion. Correlations between reversal learning results and performance task results were extremely low, indicating that the discrimination reversal learning test was not useful for predicting success at these performance tasks. Results from the two performance tasks also showed little correlation (r = 0.04, P < 0.91), indicating that horses might not use the same approach when solving the problem of crossing these two obstacles. The overall poor performance of the horses on the discrimination reversal task suggests horses may have difficulty reversing previously learned tasks.

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.

Abstract: “Clicker training” is a popularly promoted training method based on operant conditioning with the use of a secondary reinforcer (the clicker). While this method draws from theories of learning and is used widely, there has been little scientific investigation of its efficacy. We used 60 horses, Equus callabus, and assigned each horse to one of six reinforcement protocols. The reinforcement protocols involved combinations of reinforcers administered (primary versus secondary plus primary), schedule of reinforcement (continuous versus variable ratio), and reinforcers applied during extinction (none or secondary). There were no differences (P>=0.11) between horses which received a secondary reinforcer (click) followed by the primary reinforcer (food) and those which received only the primary reinforcer (food) in the number of trials required to train the horses to touch their noses to a plastic cone (operant response). There also were no differences (P>=0.12) between horses which received the secondary reinforcer plus primary reinforcer and those which received only the primary reinforcer in regards to the number of trials to extinction. We conclude that there is no difference in the amount of training required to learn the operant task or in the task's resistance to extinction between horses that received a secondary reinforcer followed by a primary reinforcer versus horses which received only a primary reinforcer.

Abstract: An early training procedure commonly termed “foal imprint training” is widely promoted in the horse industry. However, there have been no published scientific investigations of its efficacy. This study determined the effects of a training procedure on foals and their reaction to stimuli used in the early training procedure, and to a novel stimulus, at 1, 2 and 3 months of age. Twenty-five foals received a standard training procedure at 2, 12, 24, and 48 h after birth. After the training procedure, the foals received minimal additional handling that included veterinary treatments and occasional relocation. Twenty-two foals born over the same time period served as controls. All 47 (25 trained, 22 control) foals were tested at 1 month of age. Only 20 were available for testing at 2 months of age, and nine were available at 3 months. Percentage change from baseline heart rate, time required to complete exposure to each stimulus (foals that were more reactive took longer) and the behavior of each foal during the introduction of each stimulus were recorded. Overall, the control foals tended to receive lower (better) behavioral scores at 1 and 2 months of age. Foals that underwent the training procedure tended to require less time to complete exposure to the stimulus and had lower heart rates during exposure to the stimuli at 1 and 2 months of age. By 3 months of age, there were no significant differences between trained and control foals for any measures. Early training was not efficacious in this study.

Abstract: Soiled bedding influences cleanliness and disease levels in dairy cows and there is no evidence of an inherent latrine behaviour in cattle. If cows were trained to use a concrete area of the housing system as a latrine, a cleaner bed could be maintained. Thirteen group-housed, 14-16-month-old Holstein-Friesian heifers, were clicker trained with heifer-rearing concentrate pellets as a reward. Training was carried out in four phases. (Phase 1) Association of feed reward with clicker, criterion: 34/40 correct responses. (Phase 2) Simple task (nose-butting a disc) to reinforce phase 1 association, criterion: 17/20 correct responses. (Phase 3) Association of eliminative behaviour with reward where criterion was four sessions with only one incorrect response: criteria for each heifer in phases 1-3 were set using binomial tests. (Phase 4) Shaping eliminative behaviour to occur on concrete. Possible responses were, eliminating on concrete (C) or straw (S), or moving from one substrate to another immediately before eliminating: C --> S, S --> C. Heifers were rewarded for the desired behaviours C and S --> C and ignored when S and C --> S occurred. If learning was achieved, C should increase as C --> S decreased and S --> C should increase as S decreased: tested with Spearman rank correlations. All heifers achieved criterion by day 4 of phase 1 (P = 0.001); day 1 of phase 2 (P = 0.001) and day 10 of phase 3 (P < 0.009). Responses changed throughout phase 3 beginning with (i) looking at the trainer whilst voiding then moving to trainer after the click, and later including (ii) moving to trainer immediately before- or (iii) during voiding. No relationship was found between S and S --> C (rs = -0.14; P = 0.63) or C and C --> S (rs = -0.33; P = 0.25). All group members eliminated more often on concrete (580) than on straw (141) but four heifers with consistently longer lying bouts also showed more C --> S before lying down (Mann-Whitney, P = 0.007). The present study is believed to be the first reported work to show that cattle can be trained to show an awareness of their own eliminative behaviour. This was not successfully shaped to latrine behaviour, however, and it is suggested that floor type may not have been a sufficiently salient cue. Voiding on straw occurred largely with response C --> S (0.73) and general behaviour suggested that this was strongly linked to lying patterns of individual heifers.