|
|
Lingle, S., Rendall, D., Wilson, W. F., DeYoung, R. W., & Pellis, S. M. (2007). Altruism and recognition in the antipredator defence of deer: 2. Why mule deer help nonoffspring fawns. Anim. Behav., 73(5), 907–916.
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.
|
|
|
|
Lonsdorf, E. V., Ross, S. R., Linick, S. A., Milstein, M. S., & Melber, T. N. (2009). An experimental, comparative investigation of tool use in chimpanzees and gorillas. Anim. Behav., 77(5), 1119–1126.
Abstract: Studies of ape tool use have been conducted in captivity since the early 1900s and in the wild since the 1960s. Chimpanzees are the most prolific tool users among the apes, and are known to use more tools than any other nonhuman animal. In contrast, reports of gorilla tool use are rare both in wild and captive settings. Studies of the processes involved in tool use learning have been limited in the wild by the lack of ability to control several unpredictable variables, and in captivity by tool use opportunities that are often presented in non-naturalistic contexts. We attempted to address both of these limitations by providing naïve subjects with a naturalistic tool use device (built to simulate a termite mound) while housed in a more natural social setting to approximate how learning would occur in the wild. Both gorillas and chimpanzees participated in the experiment to allow comparative analyses of acquisition of tool behaviour and the factors that may affect acquisition. Both species showed low frequencies of interaction with the mound in the baseline condition, before baiting with a food reward. Once baited, chimpanzees both attempted and succeeded to extract the reward more quickly than did gorillas. The number of social group members at the mound was significantly higher for chimpanzees than for gorillas and may have affected skill acquisition. We advocate that comparative approaches to skill acquisition and learning are valuable, but that researchers need to be cognizant of species differences in social structure that may affect results.
|
|
|
|
de Vries, H. (1995). An improved test of linearity in dominance hierarchies containing unknown or tied relationships. Anim. Behav., 50(5), 1375–1389.
Abstract: Appleby (1983, Anim. Behav., 31, 600-608) described a statistical test, based on the work of Kendall (1962, Rank Correlation Methods), for the significance of linearity in dominance hierarchies. He suggested that unknown relationships should be assigned the value 1/2 and that subsequently the same test procedure can be used. In this paper it is shown that incorrect results are obtained by this method whenever there are unknown relationships. Values of the linearity index are systematically too low. P-values can be too high (underestimating the significance) or too low (overestimating), and seem to differ by not much more than a factor two (respectively a half) from the correct P-value. An improved method is developed for testing linearity in a set of dominance relationships containing unknown relationships. Furthermore, it is argued that, if one admits the possibility of tied dominance relationships, which should indeed be assigned the value 1/2, Landau's linearity index is to be preferred to Kendall's index. A randomization test is developed for assessing the significance of linearity or non-linearity in a set of dominance relationships containing unknown or tied relationships. The test statistic employed in this testing procedure is based on Landau's linearity index, but takes the unknown and tied relationships into account.
|
|
|
|
Walker, S. (1989). An introduction to animal cognition : By . Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum (1988). Pp. viii + 328. Price [pound sign]8.95 paperback. Anim. Behav., 37(Part 3), 521–522.
|
|
|
|
Hall, C. A., & Cassaday, H. J. (2006). An investigation into the effect of floor colour on the behaviour of the horse. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 99(3-4), 301–314.
Abstract: Adverse reactions of the domestic horse to environmental stimuli can be problematic in training and management. Hesitation and alarm reactions to visual features of the ground can occur in both ridden work and when handling horses. To assess the effect of one visual feature (colour) on the behaviour of the domestic horse, the reactions of 16 riding horses to 8 different coloured mats were recorded. The effect of stimulus position on these reactions was assessed by presenting them in two different positions, either on the ground (where the horses had to walk over them) or against a wall (where the horses walked past them). Each colour/position combination was presented twice in order to assess the effect of previous experience. An alleyway was constructed to allow the horses to be tested unconstrained and freely walking throughout. The time taken to traverse the alleyway and the observed reaction to the colour was recorded. Significant differences in both measures were found in relation to the position of the colour and whether the subject had previous experience of that colour/position combination. The initial presentation of the colours on the ground produced the highest percentage of adverse reactions. Certain colours encountered for the first time on the ground (yellow, white, black and blue) were found to cause a greater number of adverse reactions than others (green, red, brown and grey) and an increase in time taken to traverse the alleyway. Although a significant difference in relation to colour was found in the behaviour observed during the second presentation on the ground, no difference was found in relation to the time taken to traverse the alleyway. No significant effect of colour was found when the coloured stimuli were presented against the wall. These findings have important implications for situations where the colour of flooring could be controlled in order to minimise adverse behavioural reactions, in particular during initial training.
|
|
|
|
Langbein, J., & Puppe, B. (2004). Analysing dominance relationships by sociometric methods--a plea for a more standardised and precise approach in farm animals. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 87(3-4), 293–315.
Abstract: Social dominance is a multidimensional phenomenon occurring in all gregarious farm animals and finds its reflection in a dominance hierarchy. Hence, numerous studies have tried to analyse dominance relationships as well as to correlate outcoming results (mostly individual ranks) with other behavioural and/or physiological features of the animals. Although the concept of dominance, once established, has been developed continuously and several sociometric measures were cumulatively introduced, a consistent analysing approach has not been achieved, especially in farm animals. Thus, considerable inconsistencies in the used methodology may impair obtained results and interpretations. The present paper is a plea for a more standardised and complex approach when analysing dominance relationships, not only in farm animals. First, derived from a structural definition of dominance, we suggest in detail the preferably consistent use of appropriate sociometric measures at all social levels of analysis: the dyad as the starting level, the group as the highest level, and the individual as the basic level. Second, we applied this procedures in a case study to analyse social dominance in a group of dwarf goats (n=12) and pigs (n=10), respectively, to comparatively demonstrate benefits and problems of such an approach in two different farm animal species. It is concluded that the use of individual ranks is actually only reasonable when fundamental sociometric measures both at the dyadic level (e.g. percentage of dyads which have a significant asymmetric outcome) and at the group level (e.g. the strength of hierarchy) are successfully tested by statistical methods as also presented in this paper. The calculated sociometric measures deliver not only a more comprehensive “picture” of the social relationships within a group as simple ranks do, but also indicate possible reasons of differences in the behavioural development. For instance, whereas the dwarf goats maintained a quasi-linear dominance hierarchy over time with a high rate of overt agonistic behaviour, pigs after the establishment of their hierarchy showed a reduced agonistic behaviour which makes it questionable to calculate reliable sociometric measures. These species-dependent variations may be primarily caused by different kinds of the fighting behaviour in goats (i.e. ritualised, low costs) and pigs (i.e. more seriously, high costs). Overall, a more consistent and standardised approach of analysing social dominance in (farm) animals may improve the scientific value of single studies and makes it easier to compare various studies within a species and between species.
|
|
|
|
Shettleworth, S. J. (2001). Animal cognition and animal behaviour. Anim. Behav., 61(2), 277–286.
Abstract: Cognitive processes such as perception, learning, memory and decision making play an important role in mate choice, foraging and many other behaviours. In this review, I summarize a few key ideas about animal cognition developed in a recent book (Shettleworth 1998, Cognition, Evolution and Behaviour) and briefly review some areas in which interdisciplinary research on animal cognition is currently proving especially productive. Cognition, broadly defined, includes all ways in which animals take in information through the senses, process, retain and decide to act on it. Studying animal cognition does not entail any particular position on whether or to what degree animals are conscious. Neither does it entail rejecting behaviourism in that one of the greatest challenges in studing animal cognition is to formulate clear behavioural criteria for inferring specific mental processes. Tests of whether or not apparently goal-directed behaviour is controlled by a representation of its goal, episodic-like memory in birds, and deceptive behaviour in monkeys provide examples. Functional modelling has been integrated with analyses of cognitive mechanisms in a number of areas, including studies of communication, models of how predator learning and attention affect the evolution of conspicuous and cryptic prey, tests of the relationship betweeen ecological demands on spatial cognition and brain evolution, and in research on social learning. Rather than a `new field' of cognitive ecology, such interdisciplinary research on animal cognition exemplifies a revival of interest in proximate mechanisms of behaviour.
|
|
|
|
Bergmüller, R. (2010). Animal Personality and Behavioural Syndromes. In P. Kappeler (Ed.), Animal Behaviour – Evolution and Mechanisms (pp. 587–621). Heidelberg: Springer.
|
|
|
|
McBride, S. D., Parker, M. O., Roberts, K., & Hemmings, A. (2017). Applied neurophysiology of the horse; implications for training, husbandry and welfare. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 190, 90–101.
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.
|
|
|
|
Neumann, C., Duboscq, J., Dubuc, C., Ginting, A., Irwan, A. M., Agil, M., et al. (2011). Assessing dominance hierarchies: validation and advantages of progressive evaluation with Elo-rating. Animal Behaviour, 82(4), 911–921.
|
|
