Abstract: Summary Domestication has provided the horse with food, shelter, veterinary care and protection, allowing individuals an increased chance of survival. However, the restriction of movement, limited breeding opportunities and a requirement to expend energy, for the benefit of another species, conflict with the evolutionary processes which shaped the behaviour of its predecessors. The behaviour of the horse is defined by its niche as a social prey species but many of the traits which ensured the survival of its ancestors are difficult to accommodate in the domestic environment. There has been a long association between horses and man and many features of equine behaviour suggest a predisposition to interspecific cooperation. However, the importance of dominance in human understanding of social systems has tended to overemphasise its importance in the human-horse relationship. The evolving horse-human relationship from predation to companionship, has resulted in serial conflicts of interest for equine and human participants. Only by understanding the nature and origin of these conflicts can ethologists encourage equine management practices which minimise deleterious effects on the behaviour of the horse.

Abstract: Social observational learning is one of learning abilities expected in domestic horses (Equus caballus) because of their ecological and evolutional history. However, a few studies on this type of learning in horses failed to provide clear evidence of observational learning and/or could not distinguished it from other types of learning. We tested interspecific observational learning abilities using the spatial task and a human demonstrator. We hypothesised that 1) horses with possibility of observing a human demonstrator will complete the task in shorter time than control horses without any demonstrator, and 2) horses observing a familiar demonstrator will carry out the task in shorter time than horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator due to established positive human-horse relationship. We randomly allocated 24 riding horses of mixed age and breed to three groups per 8 and started the task either with observing a familiar demonstrator, unfamiliar demonstrator or without demonstrator (control group). Each horse was released individually at the starting point in the experimental paddock and the latency to pass the task was recorded. A horse completed the task once it walked 25 m from the starting point to the squared area (4x4 m) fenced by a tape, went into it through the entrance on the opposite side and touched the bucket with food. Eight people served as demonstrators, each for one familiar and one unfamiliar horse. Horses from groups with a demonstrator, either familiar or unfamiliar, reached the food bucket significantly faster than control horses during the first trial (mean±SE: 29.1±3.13 s with familiar, 28.9±3.13 s unfamiliar and 41.5 ± 3.13 s without demonstrator, P<0.02, GLMM, PROC MIXED, SAS). Horses did not differ in time needed to reach the fence of the squared area, but in “solving time”, i.e. time from reaching the fence of the squared area and touching the bucket (14.6±2.34, 14.3±2.34 and 27.6±2.34 s in horses with familiar, unfamiliar or without demonstrator, P<0.001). Despite our presumption, the horses observing a familiar demonstrator finished the task in comparable time as horses with an unfamiliar demonstrator (P=0.85) which indicated little effect of long lasting positive relationship between a horse and a particular human. We found, however, large individual variability in performance of individual demonstrators. Further, horses did not differ in time needed to pass the same task without a demonstrator repeated either shortly or 7 days after the first test which supported that interspecific observational learning rather than social facilitation occurred. In conclusion, horses with a human demonstrator, regardless familiar or unfamiliar, were able to solve the task in shorter time compared to control horses but they did not differ in performing repeated task if they learned it by individual or social learning process. This indicates that interspecific observational learning does occur in horses. Supported by AWIN, EU FP7 project No. 266213.

Abstract: Selection pressures during domestication are thought to lead to an enhanced ability to use human-given cues. Horses fulfil a wide variety of roles for humans and have been domesticated for at least 5000 years but their ability to read human cues has not been widely studied. We tested the ability of 28 horses to attend to human-given cues in an object choice task. We included five different cues: distal sustained pointing, momentary tapping, marker placement, body orientation and gaze (head) alternation. Horses were able to use the pointing and marker placement cues spontaneously but not the tapping, body orientation and gaze alternation cues. The overall pattern of responding suggests that horses may use cues that provide stimulus enhancement at the time of choice and do not have an understanding of the communicative nature of the cues given. As such, their proficiency at this task appears to be inferior to that of domestic dogs, Canis lupus familiaris, but similar to that of domestic goats, Caprus hircus.