|
|
Rogers, L. J. (2017). A Matter of Degree: Strength of Brain Asymmetry and Behaviour. Symmetry, 9(4).
Abstract: Research on a growing number of vertebrate species has shown that the left and right sides of the brain process information in different ways and that lateralized brain function is expressed in both specific and broad aspects of behaviour. This paper reviews the available evidence relating strength of lateralization to behavioural/cognitive performance. It begins by considering the relationship between limb preference and behaviour in humans and primates from the perspectives of direction and strength of lateralization. In birds, eye preference is used as a reflection of brain asymmetry and the strength of this asymmetry is associated with behaviour important for survival (e.g., visual discrimination of food from non-food and performance of two tasks in parallel). The same applies to studies on aquatic species, mainly fish but also tadpoles, in which strength of lateralization has been assessed as eye preferences or turning biases. Overall, the empirical evidence across vertebrate species points to the conclusion that stronger lateralization is advantageous in a wide range of contexts. Brief discussion of interhemispheric communication follows together with discussion of experiments that examined the effects of sectioning pathways connecting the left and right sides of the brain, or of preventing the development of these left-right connections. The conclusion reached is that degree of functional lateralization affects behaviour in quite similar ways across vertebrate species. Although the direction of lateralization is also important, in many situations strength of lateralization matters more. Finally, possible interactions between asymmetry in different sensory modalities is considered.
|
|
|
|
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design. qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles: Sage.
|
|
|
|
Kaplan, G. (2015). Social animals and Communication, with special reference to horses. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg, in prep. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
|
|
Palme, R. (2015). Non-invasive monitoring of stress hormones for welfare assessment in domestic and wild equids. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg, in prep. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: Stress responses play an important role in allowing animals to cope with challenges. Glucocorticoids, key elements in the neuroendocrine stress axis, are traditionally measured as a parameter for welfare assessment. As blood sample collection itself disturbs an animal, non-invasive or minimal invasive methods have gained importance for assessing stress. In horses saliva and faeces are most frequently used. Faecal samples offer the advantage that they can be collected easily and stress-free. In faecal samples circulating hormone levels are integrated over a certain period of time. As a consequence faecal glucocorticoid metabolites represent the cumulative secretion and they are less affected by short episodic fluctuations of hormone secretion.
However, in order to gain reliable information about an animal’s adrenocortical activity, certain criteria have to be met: Depending whether the impact of acute or chronic stressors is assessed, frequent sampling might be necessary whereas in other cases, single samples will suffice. Background knowledge regarding the metabolism and excretion of glucocorticoids is essential and a careful validation is obligatory. In addition, this presentation will address analytical issues regarding sample storage, extraction procedures, and immunoassays and various examples of a successful application in equids will be given. Applied properly, non-invasive techniques to monitor stress hormones are a useful tool for animal welfare assessment.
|
|
|
|
Rubenstein, D. (2015). Social Networks: Linking Form with Function in Equid Societies. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg, in prep. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: Animal societies develop from interactions and relationships that occur among individuals within populations. The fundamental tenet of behavioral ecology is that ecological factors shape behavior and determine the distribution and associations of individuals on landscapes. As a result, different social systems emerge in different habitats and under different environmental conditions. Since characterizing social systems depends on time and motion studies of individual actions and interactions that are often bilateral, such characterizations are often coarse-grained. If social relationships can be characterized using social networks, however, seemingly similar social organizations often reveal informative differences in terms of deep structure. Thus social network theory should be able to provide insights in to the connections between social form and function. This talk will explore how the network structures of horses, zebras and asses can provide novel insights into the functioning of animal societies with respect to the spread of memes, genes and diseases.
|
|
|
|
McComb, K. (2015). Social cognition and emotional awareness: studies on elephants and horses. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg, in prep. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
|
|
Rogers, L. (2015). Laterality in domestic and feral horses. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg, in prep. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
|
|
van Dierendonck, M. (2015). “Out of the box” – innovations and new developments in social housing for horses. In K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg. Wald: xenophon Publishing.
|
|
|
|
Vidament. M. (2015). Laterality and emotions : behavioural response to an approach of a novel object by young ridden horses. In , & K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
|
|
|
|
Hollenhorst, H., Weil, S., & Krueger, K. (2015). Innovative behavour in horses (Equus caballus). In , & K. Krueger (Ed.), Proceedings of the 3. International Equine Science Meeting. Proc. 3. Int. Equine. Sci. Mtg. Wald: Xenophon Publishing.
Abstract: Contrary to the widely-spread assumption that horses just have restricted cognitive capacities and are not very flexible in their behaviors, we showed that horses display innovative behavior and even make use of tools (Krueger 2015, Krueger et al. 2015). These findings derive from a database (http://innovative-behaviour.org/) the Equine behavior team managed in the past two years. Some horses did not only show single innovations, but several different innovations. The number of innovations per individual varied from 1 to 10. 20 % of all innovative horses in the database showed more than one innovation. These individuals can be called the ‘true innovators’. Moreover innovations were dependent on age. Young horses were more innovative than older ones, whereby horses at the age of five to nine years were the most innovative. When considering the housing system innovative horses in a single housing (inside box, outside box, paddock box) had a slight majority towards horses in group housing (open stable, active stable, pasture day and night). But given the fact that ratings on housing system frequencies state 95% of the horses to be kept in individual housing, innovations in individual housing are rare. Nevertheless, horses kept in inside boxes without a window, opened doors more often than all other horses. Aside from this effect, housing systems did not trigger the frequency of innovative behavior. Innovations for gaining freedom and innovations in general were widespread among horses with daily access to pasture and daily contact with conspecifics. Innovations for gaining food were not more likely to occur in horses that were fed little amounts of roughage. In conclusion, the housing of horses does not seem to be the primary catalyst for developing innovative behavior in horses. What makes a “true innovator” in horses, in addition to age, remains to be seen.
|
|
