Abstract: Example of abstract
Example text example text example text example text example text example text example
text example text example text example text example text example text example text example
text example text example text example text example text example text example text.

Abstract: Understanding perception of dairy cows to common human contact such as stroking is important for improving the human-animal relationship, animal welfare, and production. We hypothesized that repeated stroking of body regions licked most during social grooming, especially the ventral neck, would reduce cows' avoidance of and increase their approach to humans. Sixty tethered dairy cows were randomly allocated to 4 treatment groups that received 5 min of daily human contact 5 d/wk during 3 consecutive weeks: 3 groups were stroked on different body regions. The first group was stroked on the ventral part of the neck (neck); the second group on the withers (both licked often in social grooming); the third group on the lateral side of the chest (chest, licked rarely); and the last group (control) was exposed to simple human presence. The reactions to the person who had provided the treatment were measured using 2 tests in the home tie-stall assessing avoidance from an approaching person who tried to touch the head (approaching person test) and avoidance/approach reactions to a stationary person (stationary person test). Approach behavior was recorded in a novel environment using a standard arena test. In the home tie-stall, cows stroked on the neck showed less avoidance (median avoidance score: 3.33) in the approaching person test compared with cows stroked on the chest and the controls (both: 4.00). That is, at least 75% of the animals stroked on the neck tolerated the touching of their heads (75th percentile [≤] 3.75), whereas at least 50% of the cows in the other treatment groups did not accept it. The stationary person test did not reveal any differences between the treatment groups. In the arena test, the 3 stroked groups showed more approach behavior (median latencies to contact: from 145 to 240 s) compared with simple human presence (300 s), but stroking treatments did not differ from each other. Stroking, particularly the neck, reduced avoidance of and increased approach reactions to humans in both the home tie-stall and the arena. Increasing acceptance of being touched after being stroked on the neck suggests that this procedure should be adopted to improve routine handling of dairy cattle.

Abstract: A key aspect of human behaviour is cooperation1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. We tend to help others even if costs are involved. We are more likely to help when the costs are small and the benefits for the other person significant. Cooperation leads to a tension between what is best for the individual and what is best for the group. A group does better if everyone cooperates, but each individual is tempted to defect. Recently there has been much interest in exploring the effect of costly punishment on human cooperation8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. Costly punishment means paying a cost for another individual to incur a cost. It has been suggested that costly punishment promotes cooperation even in non-repeated games and without any possibility of reputation effects10. But most of our interactions are repeated and reputation is always at stake. Thus, if costly punishment is important in promoting cooperation, it must do so in a repeated setting. We have performed experiments in which, in each round of a repeated game, people choose between cooperation, defection and costly punishment. In control experiments, people could only cooperate or defect. Here we show that the option of costly punishment increases the amount of cooperation but not the average payoff of the group. Furthermore, there is a strong negative correlation between total payoff and use of costly punishment. Those people who gain the highest total payoff tend not to use costly punishment: winners don't punish. This suggests that costly punishment behaviour is maladaptive in cooperation games and might have evolved for other reasons.

Abstract: Learning to associate sensory cues with threats is critical for minimizing aversive experience. The ecological benefit of associative learning relies on accurate perception of predictive cues, but how aversive learning enhances perceptual acuity of sensory signals, particularly in humans, is unclear. We combined multivariate functional magnetic resonance imaging with olfactory psychophysics to show that initially indistinguishable odor enantiomers (mirror-image molecules) become discriminable after aversive conditioning, paralleling the spatial divergence of ensemble activity patterns in primary olfactory (piriform) cortex. Our findings indicate that aversive learning induces piriform plasticity with corresponding gains in odor enantiomer discrimination, underscoring the capacity of fear conditioning to update perceptual representation of predictive cues, over and above its well-recognized role in the acquisition of conditioned responses. That completely indiscriminable sensations can be transformed into discriminable percepts further accentuates the potency of associative learning to enhance sensory cue perception and support adaptive behavior.

Abstract: Mares quickly form a bond with their foals, probably within the first hour. They lick the foal usually beginning at the tail end, then the head and later the body of the foal. Licking behavior disappears within the first hours in most mares. Once the bond is formed the mare will let no other foal nurse and stays within a meter of the foal most of the time during the first week. The foal follows her when awake, but when he sleeps she stands over him. As the foal matures the distance the mare maintains from the foals get longer and she may graze as he sleeps. The bond of the mother to the foal gradually weakens as revealed by her response to separation from the foal. Weaning usually takes place shortly before the birth of the next foal. Some mares will attempt to steal foals and this can lead to injury of either the mares or the foal. Because of the strong and exclusive bond of most mares to their foal, foal rejection is especially abnormal. It occurs in some breeds more frequently than others, indicating a heritable component. Arabian mares reject 5% of their foals and other breeds reject less than 2%. There are three types of foal rejection- simple fear of the foal that can be quickly solved by holding the mare so the foal can suckle. The mare learns that nursing is pleasurable. This process usually takes only a few hours of holding the mare because foals suckle so frequently- about four times an hours. The second form of foal rejection is avoidance of tactile stimulation of the inguinal fold. When the foal attempts to suckle he usually strikes that skin fold and causes the mare to cow kick and move away. Desensitization to stimulation of the inguinal fold can solve this problem in a few hours. Treatment is more complex and longer for mares that are aggressive to the foal even when it does not touch them. This type of foal rejection can be treated with drugs that inhibit dopamine such as acepromazine-not the alpha adrenergic agent xylazine. Dopamine inhibits the pituitary hormone prolactin, a putative maternal hormone, which increases milk production. Blocking dopamine will increase prolactin. The mare should always have visual contact with the foal, but be restrained so she can not bite or kick the foal. A pole across the stall confining the mare against a wall is best. Maternal behavior can be induced in non-pregnant mares using injections of estrogen, progesterone, and the dopamine inhibitor sulpiride. Once lactation begins cervical stimulation can be used to elicit maternal behavior toward the next foal the mare sees.