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: Domestic hens were trained to run a Y-maze and make an association between differently coloured doorways and access to food pellets or sand. The hens were tested for their choice of doorway when the goals were not visible from the choice point and when they were food or sand deprived. Hens made the choice appropriate to their deprivation state (correct choice) significantly more often for food than sand and were faster at choosing and entering the goal box when food deprived. In a follow up experiment, the goals were visible from the choice point. Again the hens chose correctly significantly more often when food than sand deprived and made the choice and entered the goal box faster when food deprived. Thus, failure to choose sand in the first experiment was not due to an inability to learn the association, but appears to result from a strong motivation to feed in the Y-maze, even when not food deprived, and a weak motivation to dustbathe or forage, even when sand deprived.

Abstract: Four experiments were designed to find evidence of observational learning in cattle. The experiments were run on ten experimental heifers, each observing a demonstrator mate performing a task, and on ten control heifers, each observing a non-demonstrator mate. The mates and observers were separated by wire netting in Experiments 1-3, but were in the same room in Experiment 4. The task to be learned was to push a panel to get food into a box. All naive animals were able to observe while their mate performed the task. The observers in Experiments 1 and 4 were Salers heifers that had no prior experience of the testing room; those in Experiment 2 were Salers heifers that were accustomed to the room; those in Experiment 3 were Aubrac or Limousin heifers that had already eaten in the room.
The behaviour of the observers was influenced by their mates: activity at or near the boxes was enhanced by the presence of demonstrators in Experiment 2 (box contacts: 38.0 +/- 16.2 vs. 22.1 +/- 11.9 for experimental and control heifers, respectively; P<0.05), while activity in other parts of the room in Experiment 3 was enhanced when non-demonstrator mates were present (wall sniffing: 5.4 +/- 13.9 vs. 13.9 +/- 13.7; P<0.05). Overall, 26 experimental heifers vs. 19 controls learned the task (P>0.05). The time spent eating was longer when the observer only had visual contact with a demonstrator (Experiment 1: 15.9 +/- 1.6 vs. 11.6 +/- 1.8 min), but was lower when physical contacts with the demonstrator were possible (Experiment 4: 4.6 +/- 8.8 vs. 5.4 +/- 2.2 min; P<0.05).
Ten out of the 11 Limousin heifers learned the task, compared with only three out of the nine Aubrac heifers (P<0.05). The latter spent more time near the door and sniffed the walls more often than the former (2.0 +/- 1.9 vs. 0.4 +/- 0.6 min, P<0.05, and 18.1 +/- 13.4 vs. 2.7 +/- 6.5 min, P<0.01), as though they were trying to flee the situation.
When animals observed a demonstrator, their attention was drawn to stimuli involved in the task but acquisition of knowledge was not greatly improved.

Abstract: Virtually all studies of mate choice to date have assumed that females choose mates independent of one another. Social cues, however, such as the mate choice of conspecifics, may also play an important role in such decisions. Previous work has shown that female guppies of similar age copy each other's choice of mates. Here we examine the effect of relative age on mate choice copying in the guppy, Poecilia reticulata, and examine whether younger individuals are more likely to copy the mate choice of older conspecifics than vice versa. Results indicate that younger females copy the mate choice of older females, but older individuals do not appear to be influenced by the mate choice of younger individuals.

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.