|
|
Hartmann, E., Christensen, J. W., & McGreevy, P. D. Dominance and leadership: Useful concepts in human-horse interactions? Journal of Equine Veterinary Science, .
Abstract: Dominance hierarchies in horses primarily influence priority access to limited resources of any kind, resulting in predictable contest outcomes that potentially minimize aggressive encounters and associated risk of injury. Levels of aggression in group-kept horses under domestic conditions have been reported to be higher than in their feral counterparts but can often be attributed to sub-optimal management. Horse owners often express concerns about the risk of injuries occurring in group-kept horses but these concerns have not been substantiated by empirical investigations. What has not yet been sufficiently addressed are human safety aspects related to approaching and handling group-kept horses. Given horses? natural tendency to synchronize activity to promote group cohesion, questions remain about how group dynamics influence human-horse interactions. Group dynamics influence a variety of management scenarios, ranging from taking a horse out of its social group to the prospect of humans mimicking the horse?s social system by taking a putative leadership role and seeking after an alpha position in the dominance hierarchy to achieve compliance. Yet, there is considerable debate about whether the roles horses attain in their social group are of any relevance in their reactions to humans. This article reviews the empirical data on social dynamics in horses, focusing on dominance and leadership theories and the merits of incorporating those concepts into the human-horse context. This will provide a constructive framework for informed debate and valuable guidance for owners managing group-kept horses and for optimizing human-horse interactions.
|
|
|
|
Albright, J., Sun, X., & Houpt, K. Does cribbing behavior in horses vary with dietary taste or direct gastric stimuli? Appl Anim Behav Sci, .
Abstract: Abstract Concentrated feed diets have been shown to drastically increase the rate of the cribbing, an oral stereotypy in horses, but the specific component causing the rise has not been identified. Furthermore, the mechanism through which feed affects cribbing has not been explored. In the first experiment of this study, we quantified the latency to crib and number of cribs in 15 min after the horses tasted various grain, sugar, and artificial sweetener solutions. Undiluted grain stimulated the most cribs (P < 0.01) compared with all other solutions, and shortest latency to crib, although this was significantly higher only when compared with diluted grain (P = 0.03). In Experiment 2, latency to crib and number of cribs in 15 min after the grain and sugar solutions were administered via nasograstric tube were also evaluated. There were no statistical differences among cribbing responses to grain, fructose, and water administered directly to the stomach although grain stimulated cribbing behavior more quickly than 10% fructose (P = 0.03) and 100% tap water (P = 0.04). These results confirm that highly palatable diets, possibly mediated through the opioid and dopaminergic systems, are one of the most potent inducers of cribbing behavior. The highly palatable taste remains the probable “cribogenic” factor of concentrated diet, although gastric and post-gastric effects cannot be excluded.
|
|
|
|
Place Holder Author. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
|
|
Alexander, F., & Benzie, D. (1951). A radiological study of the digestive tract of the foal. Q J Exp Physiol Cogn Med Sci, 36(4), 213–217.
|
|
|
|
Alexander, F. (1952). Some functions of the large intestine of the horse. Q J Exp Physiol Cogn Med Sci, 37(4), 205–214.
|
|
|
|
Alexander, F. (1955). Factors affecting the blood sugar concentration in horses. Q J Exp Physiol Cogn Med Sci, 40(1), 24–31.
|
|
|
|
Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social Facilitation. Science, 149(3681), 269–274.
Abstract: 300 Multiple ChoicesThis is a pdf-only article and there is no markup to show you.full-text.pdf
|
|
|
|
Jolly, A. (1966). Lemur social behavior and primate intelligence. Science, 153(3735), 501–506.
Abstract: Our human intellect has resulted from an enormous leap in capacity above the level of monkeys and apes. Earlier, though, Old and New World monkeys' intelligence outdistanced that of other mammals, including the prosimian primates. This first great advance in intelligence probably was selected through interspecific competition on the large continents. However, even at this early stage, primate social life provided the evolutionary context of primate intelligence.
Two arguments support this conclusion. One is ontogenetic: modern monkeys learn so much of their social behavior, and learn their behavior toward food and toward other species through social example. The second is phylogenetic: some prosimians, the social lemurs, have evolved the usual primate type of society and social learning without the capacity to manipulate objects as monkeys do. It thus seems likely that the rudiments of primate society preceded the growth of primate intelligence, made it possible, and determined its nature.
|
|
|
|
Kawamura, S. (1967). Aggression as studied in troops of Japanese monkeys. UCLA Forum Med Sci, 7, 195–223.
|
|
|
|
John, E. R., Chesler, P., Bartlett, F., & Victor, I. (1968). Observation Learning in Cats. Science, 159(3822), 1489–1491.
Abstract: In two experiments cats acquired a stimulus-controlled approach or avoidance response by observational or conventional shaping procedures. Observer cats acquired the avoidance response (hurdle jumping in response to a buzzer stimulus) significantly faster and made fewer errors than cats that were conventionally trained. Observer cats acquired the approach response (lever pressing for food in response to a light stimulus) with significantly fewer errors than cats that were conventionally trained. In some cases, observer cats committed one or no errors while reaching criterion.
|
|
