Abstract: This paper reviews the investigations of Prof. L. V. Krushinsky and his colleagues into the genetics of complex behaviors in mammals. The ability of animals to extrapolate the direction of a food stimulus movement was investigated in wild and domesticated foxes (including different fur-color mutants), wild brown rats, and laboratory rats and mice. Wild animals (raised in the laboratory) were shown to be superior to their respective domesticated forms on performance of the extrapolation task, especially in their scores for the first presentation, in which no previous experience could be used. Laboratory rats and mice demonstrated a low level of extrapolation performance. This means that only a few laboratory animals were capable of solving the task, i.e., the percentage of correct solutions was equivalent to chance. The brain weight selection program resulted in two mice strains with a 20% (90-mg) difference in brain weight. Ability to solve the extrapolation task was present in low-brain weight mice in generations 7-11 but declined with further selection. Investigation of extrapolation ability in mice with different chromosomal anomalies demonstrated that animals with Robertsonian translocations Rb(8,17) 1lem and Rb(8,17) 6Sic were capable of solving this task in a statistically significant majority of cases, while mice with fusion of other chromosomes, as well as CBA normal karyotype mice, performed no better than expected by chance. Mice with two types of partial trisomies and animals homo- and heterozygous for translocations were also tested. Although mice with T6 trisomy performed no better than expected by chance, animals with trisomy for a chromosome 17 fragment solved the task successfully. Thus, a genetic component underlying the ability to solve the extrapolation task was demonstrated in three animal species. The extrapolation task in animals is considered to reveal a general capacity for elementary reasoning. The genetic basis of this capacity is very complex.

Abstract: 1. Data on plant species foraged, foraging hours, bite rate, bite size and species dry matter (DM) removed per species per bite were collected in tussock grass-forb (Grass-F), forb-tussock grass (Forb-G), Trachydium-forb (Forb), Rhododendron-Cassiope and early successional communities from May to September in a moderately foraged Central Himalayan alpine meadow in order to study the foraging niche characteristics of horses, sheep and goats. 2. The three animals together grazed 30 plant species, of which 20 were grazed by horses, 22 by sheep and 16 by goats. 3. The average foraging hours (5.2-13.2), bites per minute (23-51) and mg DM per bite (59-99) for horses, sheep and goats were significantly different in different communities and months. 4. The foraging search cost, reckoned as distance walked per unit DM eaten, was highest for goats (15.4 km kg$^{-1}$), followed by sheep (8.1 km kg$^{-1}$) and horses (1.2 km kg$^{-1}$). 5. Of the total intake of horses (3.25 kg DM day$^{-1}$), the Forb community alone accounted for 40%. Sheep (0.74 kg DM day$^{-1}$) resembled horses in this respect. In contrast, the contribution of this community was negligible in the diet of goats in which the Grass-F community contributed most to the intake. 6. Forbs were the largest dietary category for all animal species. The selection ratio varied from 0.7 to 11.3 for forbs, 1.0 to 7.2 for sedges and 1.1 to 2.5 for grasses. 7. Response breadth (in terms of species grazed) was similar for horses and sheep (0.46 vs. 0.43) and somewhat wider for goats (0.49). 8. Grazing pressures below the carrying capacity of the community appeared to favour botanical diversity.

Abstract: Fourteen Arabian foals were used to determine if a one-trial appetitive conditioning task, developed for laboratory rats, could be adapted for use in equine learning research. The learning apparatus consisted of a 1.5 m x 0.6 m wooden grid containing 40 compartments. Seven foals received a complete learning test which consisted of placing a foal in a pen with the learning apparatus on one wall, recording the foal's behavior for 5 min and then placing a food reinforcer in a target compartment (TC). After location of the food, the foal's behavior was recorded for an additional 5 min. Total visits made to the apparatus and compartments visited by the foal were recorded. The remaining seven foals received a test in which no reinforcer was placed in the TC. These foals were re-tested the next day with reinforcement. After location of the food reinforcer, all foals exhibited more visits to the apparatus, visits to the TC, visits one compartment from the TC, and visits greater than one and less than or equal to two compartments from the TC (P<0.05). Mean distance of visits from the TC decreased after location of the reinforcer (P<0.05). Increased frequency of visits to the apparatus and concentration of visits around the TC after finding the reinforcer suggest that foals had learned the location of the reinforcer. Results suggest that a one-trial appetitive conditioning test may be applicable in equine learning research.

Abstract: Sixteen horses were used to determine if number of trials given per training session (5, 10, 15 or 20) affected learning performance in an avoidance conditioning task. The horse had to move from one side of a test pen to the other during an auditory cue presentation to avoid aversive stimulation. A pen 8 mx3.6 m, divided into two equal sections by a 13-cm diameter plastic pipe lying on the ground, was used as the test pen. Painted plywood panels were fastened to the fence in half the pen to help horses distinguish visually between the two parts. A 10-s auditory cue was used as a signal for horses to move from one side of the test pen to the other. A 20-s intertrial interval was used. Training sessions were conducted every third day. Each trial was recorded as an avoidance (the horse completed the task during auditory cue presentation and avoided aversive stimulus) or an error (the horse received aversive stimulus). After completing ten consecutive avoidances (criterion), the horse was removed from the study. Numbers of training sessions, trials, avoidances and errors until reaching criterion were recorded for each horse. Horses varied greatly within these variables with ranges of 3-18 sessions, 37-121 trials, 20-68 avoidances and 17-53 errors to criterion. No differences were detected (P>0.05) in the number of conditioning trials per training session (treatment) for the mean number of trials, avoidances or errors to criterion. Number of training sessions to criterion differed (P<0.01) among treatments, indicating that an optimum number of learning trials per training session might exist. Mean sessions to criterion for horses receiving 5, 10, 15 and 20 trials per session were 15.1+/-1.3, 5.8+/-1.1, 5.3+/-1.1 and 4.6+/-1.1, respectively. Regression analysis indicated that 16.2 trials per training session would minimize number of sessions to criterion. Although it is widely assumed that learning efficiency in horses is decreased when intense activity is concentrated into a small number of sessions, these results indicate that moderate repetition of training activities is needed for efficient learning.