Abstract: Monitoring of the wolf Canis lupus is a demanding task as it lives in low densities, utilizes vast home ranges and disperses over large areas. These factors make obtaining accurate data about population parameters over the whole distribution area of the species impossible. Thus detailed local studies on socio-spatial organization are essential to calibrate information obtained over a larger area. We applied GPS/GSM telemetry, non-invasive genetic sampling, year-round tracking, camera trapping and howling stimulations to determine the number of family groups, population density and home-range sizes of wolves in the Drawa Forest (DF, western Poland, 2500 km2), an area recently recolonized by the species. Home ranges of three collared male wolves ranged from 321.8 to 420.6 km2 (MCP 100%) and from 187.5 to 277.5 km2 (Kernel 95%), but core areas had a size of 30.5-84.7 km2 (MCP50%) and 35.0-88.8 km2 (Kernel 50%). Mean near neighbour distance between centres of 6 tracked pack homesites was 15.3 km. The number of wolves in DF increased from 14 individuals in 2013/2014 to 30 in 2016/2017. The annual rate of increase varied from 43% in 2014/2015 to 7% in the final year. Population density for the whole study area was relatively low (1.2 indiv./100 km2 in 2016/2017), but densities within territories of two packs studied with telemetry were 1.9 and 1.5 indiv./100 km2. Mean pack size varied between 3.5 and 5.6 individuals, with the largest pack comprising 8 wolves. Mean number of pups observed in summers (June-August) was 4.5. Differences in home range sizes between wolves in western and eastern Poland indicate that results of regional studies cannot be freely extrapolated despite close genetic relationships. Thus, decisions related to management of wolf habitats should be based on intensive local studies.

Abstract: Learning through the observation of others allows the transfer of information without the costs incurred during individual trial and error learning. Horses (Equus caballus) are a highly social species, which might be expected to be capable of learning from others, but experimental findings are inconsistent, and potentially confounded by social facilitation effects not related directly to the learning of the task. We refined the methods used in previous equine social learning studies, to examine and distinguish specific social influences on learning of a task: we used predefined group leaders rather than agonistically dominant individuals to demonstrate a detour task to familiar conspecific observers; in addition we had two control groups: a non-observer (true control) and a group with the demonstrator simply present at the goal (social facilitation control). 44 socially kept horses were allocated to one of the three test conditions and took part in five trials each. Success rate, latency and detour direction were recorded. There was no significant difference between the three groups in the likelihood of them succeeding in the task nor latency to succeed; however there was a significant difference in the route chosen by the groups, with the true control choosing the side with the entrance gate significantly more than either the observer group or social facilitation group. Both of the latter two groups chose to go in the same direction relative to themselves, regardless of which side the gate was. Seven out of nine horses in the observer group chose the same direction as their demonstrator every time. Our results show a significant role of social facilitation on detour behaviour and highlight the importance of including adequate controls for simpler cognitive influences on behaviour before claims can be made about the specific learning of motor actions or goal directed behaviour. Social cues may be important to horses if the task is sufficiently challenging and motivationally important, so future work should consider more demanding, but ecologically relevant situations, in order to maximise the potential revelation of social learning effects which do not depend on simple local or stimulus enhancement effects.

Abstract: The aim of this study was to conduct a series of paper-based exercises in order to assess the negative (adverse) welfare impacts, if any, of common interventions on domestic horses across a broad range of different contexts of equine care and training. An international panel (with professional expertise in psychology, equitation science, veterinary science, education, welfare, equestrian coaching, advocacy, and community engagement; n = 16) met over a four-day period to define and assess these interventions, using an adaptation of the domain-based assessment model. The interventions were considered within 14 contexts: C1 Weaning; C2 Diet; C3 Housing; C4 Foundation training; C5 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly medical); C6 Ill-health and veterinary interventions (chiefly surgical); C7 Elective procedures; C8 Care procedures; C9 Restraint for management procedures; C10 Road transport; C11 Activity—competition; C12 Activity—work; C13 Activity—breeding females; and C14 Activity—breeding males. Scores on a 1–10 scale for Domain 5 (the mental domain) gathered during the workshop were compared with overall impact scores on a 1–10 scale assigned by the same panellists individually before the workshop. The most severe (median and interquartile range, IQR) impacts within each context were identified during the workshop as: C1 abrupt, individual weaning (10 IQR 1); C2 feeding 100% low-energy concentrate (8 IQR 2.5); C3 indoor tie stalls with no social contact (9 IQR 1.5); C4 both (i) dropping horse with ropes (9 IQR 0.5) and forced flexion (9 IQR 0.5); C5 long-term curative medical treatments (8 IQR 3); C6 major deep intracavity surgery (8.5 IQR 1); C7 castration without veterinary supervision (10 IQR 1); C8 both (i) tongue ties (8 IQR 2.5) and (ii) restrictive nosebands (8 IQR 2.5); C9 ear twitch (8 IQR 1); C10 both (i) individual transport (7.00 IQR 1.5) and group transport with unfamiliar companions (7 IQR 1.5); C11 both (i) jumps racing (8 IQR 2.5) and Western performance (8 IQR 1.5); C12 carriage and haulage work (6 IQR 1.5); C13 wet nurse during transition between foals (7.5 IQR 3.75); and C14 teaser horse (7 IQR 8). Associations between pre-workshop and workshop scores were high, but some rankings changed after workshop participation, particularly relating to breeding practices. Domain 1 had the weakest association with Domain 5. The current article discusses the use of the domain-based model in equine welfare assessment, and offers a series of assumptions within each context that future users of the same approach may make when assessing animal welfare under the categories reported here. It also discusses some limitations in the framework that was used to apply the model.

Abstract: Equine welfare can be enhanced by applying species specific training. This may incorporate social learning, as horses are highly social and social stimuli are of primary importance. Social learning is comparable to individual learning in its learning mechanisms, differing primarily in the way it is stimulated. Our initial study showed that horses of different breeds (N = 38) follow humans after observing other horses doing so, but only if the observed horse was familiar to and higher ranking than the observer (Fisher's exact test: N = 12, P = 0.003). A second study showed that horses and ponies (N = 25) learned to pull a rope to open a feeding apparatus after observing demonstrations by conspecifics, again, only if the demonstrating horse was older and higher ranking than the observer (Fisher's combination test, N = 3, v2 = 27.71, p = 0.006). Our third approach showed that horses and ponies (N = 24) learned to press a switch to open a feeding apparatus after observing a familiar person (GzLM: N = 24, z = 2.33, P = 0.02). Most recently, we confronted horses and ponies (N = 50) with persons demonstrating different techniques for opening a feeding apparatus. In this study we investigated whether the horses would copy the demonstrators' techniques or apply their own. Here only some horses copied the technique, and most of the successful learners used their mouths irrespective of the demonstrators' postures (Chi Square Test: N = 40, df = 2, &#967;2 = 31.4, p < 0.001). In all the approaches social stimuli elicited learning processes in the test horses, while only a few individuals in the control groups mastered the tasks by individual learning. The following behaviour observed in the initial study may have been facilitated by a social stimuli (social facilitation), and the opening of the feed boxes in the subsequent studies appear to be mostly the result of enhancement (social enhancement). Some horses may have used the social stimuli at first and continued their learning process by individual trial and error. However, the horses were also selective in whom and some in how to copy. This may have been conditioned (socially conditioned) or the result of simple forms of reasoning on the reliability of the particular information provided by demonstrators of certain social ranks or social positions, as high ranking and familiar horses and familiar persons were copied and some imitated exactly.
Lay person message: Traditional riding instructions suggest that horses learn by observing other horses. For example, older, more experienced driving horses are used for initial training of young driving horses. We have shown that horses indeed use learning stimuli provided by other horse, as well as by humans. Horses readily accept stimuli observed in high ranking and familiar horses, and familiar persons. Such stimuli elicit learning processes which are comparable to individual learning. We suggest applying social learning whenever possible, as it is much faster and less stressful than individual learning, where learners experience negative outcomes in trial and error learning.

Abstract: Since the non-invasive field endocrinology techniques were developed, several fecal preservation and extraction methods have been established for a variety of species. However, direct adaptation of methods from previous studies for use in crested macaques should be taken with caution. We conducted an experiment to assess the accuracy and stability of fecal estrogen metabolite (E1C) and glucocorticoid metabolite (GCM) concentrations in response to several preservation parameters: (1) time lag between sample collection and fecal preservation; (2) long-term storage of fecal samples in 80% methanol (MeOH) at ambient temperature; (3) different degrees of feces drying temperature using a conventional oven; and (4) different fecal preservation techniques (i.e., freeze-drying, oven-drying, and field-friendly extraction method) and extraction solvents (methanol, ethanol, and commercial alcohol). The study used fecal samples collected from crested macaques (Macaca nigra) living in the Tangkoko Reserve, North Sulawesi, Indonesia. Samples were assayed using validated E1C and GCM enzyme immunoassays. Concentrations of E1C and GCM in unprocessed feces stored at ambient temperature remained stable for up to 8 h of storage after which concentrations of both E1C and GCM changed significantly compared to controls extracted at time 0. Long-term storage in 80% MeOH at ambient temperature affected hormone concentrations significantly with concentrations of both E1C and GCM increasing after 6 and 4 months of storage, respectively. Drying fecal samples using a conventional oven at 50, 70, and 90 °C did not affect the E1C concentrations, but led to a significant decline for GCM concentrations in samples dried at 90 °C. Different fecal preservation techniques and extraction solvents provided similar results for both E1C and GCM concentrations. Our results confirm previous studies that prior to application of fecal hormone analysis in a new species, several preservation parameters should be evaluated for their effects on hormone metabolite stability. The results also provide several options for fecal preservation, extraction, and storage methods that can be selected depending on the condition of the field site and laboratory.