|
|
Carlsson, H. - E., Lyberg, K., Royo, F., & Hau, J. (2007). Quantification of stress sensitive markers in single fecal samples do not accurately predict excretion of these in the pig. Research in Veterinary Science, 82(3), 423–428.
Abstract: All feces produced during 24 h were collected from five pigs and cortisol and immunoreactive cortisol metabolites (CICM), and IgA were quantified. Within pigs, the concentrations of CICM and IgA varied extensively between random samples obtained from a single fecal dropping, and deviated in most cases significantly from the true concentration measured in total fecal output (CV 6.7–130%). The CICM and IgA contents varied considerably (CV 8.1–114%) within and between individual fecal droppings from the same pig compared to the total fecal excretion. In conclusion, single random samples could not be used to reliably quantify the total fecal concentration or excretion of CICM or IgA in pigs. Analyses of all feces collected during shorter periods than 24 h did not provide an accurate estimate of the daily excretion of CICM. Thus, the concentration of stress sensitive molecules in random single fecal samples as an indicator of animal welfare should be interpreted with prudence.
|
|
|
|
Jordan, J. (1970). [Modern views on the structure and function of the vomeronasal (Jacobson's) organ in mammals]. Otolaryngol Pol, 24(4), 457–462.
|
|
|
|
Yokoyama, S., & Radlwimmer, F. B. (1999). The molecular genetics of red and green color vision in mammals. Genetics, 153(2), 919–932.
Abstract: To elucidate the molecular mechanisms of red-green color vision in mammals, we have cloned and sequenced the red and green opsin cDNAs of cat (Felis catus), horse (Equus caballus), gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), and guinea pig (Cavia porcellus). These opsins were expressed in COS1 cells and reconstituted with 11-cis-retinal. The purified visual pigments of the cat, horse, squirrel, deer, and guinea pig have lambdamax values at 553, 545, 532, 531, and 516 nm, respectively, which are precise to within +/-1 nm. We also regenerated the “true” red pigment of goldfish (Carassius auratus), which has a lambdamax value at 559 +/- 4 nm. Multiple linear regression analyses show that S180A, H197Y, Y277F, T285A, and A308S shift the lambdamax values of the red and green pigments in mammals toward blue by 7, 28, 7, 15, and 16 nm, respectively, and the reverse amino acid changes toward red by the same extents. The additive effects of these amino acid changes fully explain the red-green color vision in a wide range of mammalian species, goldfish, American chameleon (Anolis carolinensis), and pigeon (Columba livia).
|
|
|
|
Boray, J. C. (1969). Experimental fascioliasis in Australia. Adv Parasitol, 7, 95–210.
|
|
|
|
Rumiantsev, S. N. (1973). [Biological function of Clostridium tetani toxin (ecological and evolutionary aspects)]. Zh Evol Biokhim Fiziol, 9(5), 474–480.
|
|
|
|
Shoshani, J., Kupsky, W. J., & Marchant, G. H. (2006). Elephant brain. Part I: gross morphology, functions, comparative anatomy, and evolution. Brain Res Bull, 70(2), 124–157.
Abstract: We report morphological data on brains of four African, Loxodonta africana, and three Asian elephants, Elephas maximus, and compare findings to literature. Brains exhibit a gyral pattern more complex and with more numerous gyri than in primates, humans included, and in carnivores, but less complex than in cetaceans. Cerebral frontal, parietal, temporal, limbic, and insular lobes are well developed, whereas the occipital lobe is relatively small. The insula is not as opercularized as in man. The temporal lobe is disproportionately large and expands laterally. Humans and elephants have three parallel temporal gyri: superior, middle, and inferior. Hippocampal sizes in elephants and humans are comparable, but proportionally smaller in elephant. A possible carotid rete was observed at the base of the brain. Brain size appears to be related to body size, ecology, sociality, and longevity. Elephant adult brain averages 4783 g, the largest among living and extinct terrestrial mammals; elephant neonate brain averages 50% of its adult brain weight (25% in humans). Cerebellar weight averages 18.6% of brain (1.8 times larger than in humans). During evolution, encephalization quotient has increased by 10-fold (0.2 for extinct Moeritherium, approximately 2.0 for extant elephants). We present 20 figures of the elephant brain, 16 of which contain new material. Similarities between human and elephant brains could be due to convergent evolution; both display mosaic characters and are highly derived mammals. Humans and elephants use and make tools and show a range of complex learning skills and behaviors. In elephants, the large amount of cerebral cortex, especially in the temporal lobe, and the well-developed olfactory system, structures associated with complex learning and behavioral functions in humans, may provide the substrate for such complex skills and behavior.
|
|
|
|
Koba, Y., & Tanida, H. (1999). How do miniature pigs discriminate between people? The effect of exchanging cues between a non-handler and their familiar handler on discrimination. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 61(3), 239–252.
Abstract: Behavioural tests using operant conditioning were conducted to examine how miniature pigs discriminate between people. During a 3-week handling period, six 8-week-old pigs were touched and fed raisins as a reward whenever they approached their handler. In subsequent training, the handler and a non-handler wearing dark blue and white coveralls, respectively, and wearing different eau de toilette fragrances sat at each end of a Y-maze. Pigs were rewarded with raisins when they chose the handler. Successful discrimination occurred when the pig chose the handler at least 15 times in 20 trials (P<0.05: by χ2 test). When all pigs exhibited successful discrimination under these standard conditions, they were exposed to Experiments 1 through 4. In Experiment 1, (1) handler and non-handler exchanged colours of coveralls; (2) handler and non-handler exchanged eau de toilette; (3) handler and non-handler exchanged both cues. The non-handler was chosen significantly more often following the exchange of coverall colours and the exchange of both coverall colours and eau de toilette. However, the handler was chosen significantly more frequently following exchange of eau de toilette only. In Experiment 2, when both handler and non-handler wore coveralls of the handler's original colour, the pigs had difficulty discriminating between them. In Experiment 3, both handler and non-handler wore coveralls of new colours. The pigs easily chose the handler wearing red or blue vs. white coveralls. In Experiment 4, (1) two novel people wore coveralls of the original colours of handler and non-handler; (2) the test with the original experimenters was conducted under the original conditions but in a novel place. Between novel people, the one wearing the handler's original colour of coveralls was preferentially chosen by the pigs. The pigs had difficulty discriminating the handler from the non-handler in a novel place. Pigs appear to discriminate between a familiar handler and a non-familiar person based primarily on visual cues, prominent of which is colour of clothing.
|
|
|
|
Koba, Y., & Tanida, H. (2001). How do miniature pigs discriminate between people?: Discrimination between people wearing coveralls of the same colour. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci., 73(1), 45–58.
Abstract: Seven experiments were conducted on four miniature pigs to determine: (1) whether the pigs can discriminate between people wearing the same coloured clothing; (2) what cues they rely on if they could discriminate. For 2 weeks before the experiments began, the pigs were conditioned in a Y-maze to receive raisins from the rewarder wearing dark blue coveralls. They were then given the opportunity to choose the rewarder or non-rewarder in these experiments. Each session consisted of 20 trials. Successful discrimination was that the pig chose the rewarder at least 15 times in 20 trials (P<0.05: by χ2-test). In Experiment 1, both rewarder and non-rewarder wore dark blue coveralls. By 20 sessions, all pigs successfully identified the rewarder. In Experiment 2: (1) both wore coveralls of the same new colours or (2) one of them wore coveralls of new colours. They significantly preferred the rewarder even though the rewarder and/or non-rewarder wore coveralls of new colours. In Experiment 3, both wore dark blue coveralls but olfactory cues were obscured and auditory cues were not given. The pigs were able to identify the rewarder successfully irrespective of changing auditory and olfactory cues. In Experiment 4, both wore dark blue coveralls but covered part of their face and body in different ways. The correct response rate decreased when a part of the face and the whole body of the rewarder and non-rewarder were covered. In Experiment 5, both wore dark blue coveralls and changed their apparent body size by shifting sitting position. The correct response rate increased as the difference in body size between the experimenters increased. In Experiment 6, the distance between the experimenters and the pig was increased by 30 cm increments. The correct response rate of each pig decreased as the experimenters receded from the pig, but performance varied among the pigs. In Experiment 7, the light intensity of the experimental room was reduced from 550 to 80 lx and then to 20 lx. The correct response rate of each pig decreased with the reduction in light intensity, but all the pigs discriminated the rewarder from the non-rewarder significantly even at 20 lx. In conclusion, the pigs were able to discriminate between people wearing coveralls of the same colour after sufficient reinforcement. These results indicate that pigs are capable of using visual cues to discriminate between people.
|
|
