Performance of goats in a detour and a problem-solving test following long-term cognitive test exposure

How to solve novel problems: the role of associative learning in problem-solving performance in wild great tits Parus major

Although problem-solving tasks are frequently used to assess innovative ability, the extent to which problem-solving performance reflects variation in cognitive skills has been rarely formally investigated. Using wild breeding great tits facing a new non-food motivated problem-solving task, we investigated the role of associative learning in finding the solution, compared to multiple other non-cognitive factors. We first examined the role of accuracy (the proportion of contacts made with the opening part of a string-pulling task), neophobia, exploration, activity, age, sex, body condition and participation time on the ability to solve the task. To highlight the effect of associative learning, we then compared accuracy between solvers and non-solvers, before and after the first cue to the solution (i.e., the first time they pulled the string opening the door). We finally compared accuracy over consecutive entrances for solvers. Using 884 observations from 788 great tits tested from 2010 to 2015, we showed that, prior to initial successful entrance, solvers were more accurate and more explorative than non-solvers, and that females were more likely to solve the task than males. The accuracy of solvers, but not of non-solvers, increased significantly after they had the opportunity to associate string pulling with the movement of the door, giving them a first cue to the task solution. The accuracy of solvers also increased over successive entrances. Our results demonstrate that variations in problem-solving performance primarily reflect inherent individual differences in associative learning, and are also to a lesser extent shaped by sex and exploratory behaviour.

Domestication and breeding objective did not shape the interpretation of physical and social cues in goats (Capra hircus)

Artificial selection by humans, either through domestication or subsequent selection for specific breeding objectives, drives changes in animal cognition and behaviour. However, most previous cognitive research comparing domestic and wild animals has focused on companion animals such as canids, limiting any general claims about the effects of artificial selection by humans. Using a cognitive test battery, we investigated the ability of wild goats (non-domestic, seven subjects), dwarf goats (domestic, not selected for milk production, 15 subjects) and dairy goats (domestic, selected for high milk yield, 18 subjects) to utilise physical and social cues in an object choice task. To increase the heterogeneity of our test samples, data for domestic goats were collected by two experimenters at two research stations (Agroscope; Research Institute for Farm Animal Biology). We did not find performance differences between the three groups in the cognitive test battery for either physical or social cues. This indicates that for a domestic non-companion animal species, domestication and selection for certain breeding objectives did not measurably shape the physical and cognitive skills of goats.

Responsiveness of domesticated goats towards various stressors following long-term cognitive test exposure

Current evidence suggests that frequent exposure to situations in which captive animals can solve cognitive tasks may have positive effects on stress responsiveness and thus on welfare. However, confounding factors often hamper the interpretation of study results. In this study, we used human-presented object-choice tests (in form of visual discrimination and reversal learning tests and a cognitive test battery), to assess the effect of long-term cognitive stimulation (44 sessions over 4-5 months) on behavioural and cardiac responses of female domestic goats in subsequent stress tests. To disentangle whether cognitive stimulation per se or the reward associated with the human-animal interaction required for testing was affecting the stress responsiveness, we conditioned three treatment groups: goats that were isolated for participation in human-presented cognitive tests and rewarded with food ('Cognitive', COG treatment), goats that were isolated as for the test exposure and rewarded with food by the experimenter without being administered the object-choice tests ('Positive', POS treatment), and goats that were isolated in the same test room but neither received a reward nor were administered the tests ('Isolation', ISO treatment). All treatment groups were subsequently tested in four stress tests: a novel arena test, a novel object test, a novel human test, and a weighing test in which goats had to enter and exit a scale cage. All treatment groups weretested at the same two research sites, each using two selection lines, namely dwarf goats, not selected for production traits, and dairy goats, selected for high productivity. Analysing the data with principal component analysis and linear mixed-effects models, we did not find evidence that cognitive testing per se (COG-POS contrast) reduces stress responsiveness of goats in subsequent stress tests. However, for dwarf goats but not for dairy goats, we found support for an effect of reward-associated human-animal interactions (POS-ISO contrast) at least for some stress test measures. Our results highlight the need to consider ontogenetic and genetic variation when assessing stress responsiveness and when interacting with goats.

Humans and Goats: Improving Knowledge for a Better Relationship

Simple Summary

A good relationship between humans (e.g., farmers, owners) and farm animals is vital for the well-being of both parties: on the one hand, people are satisfied with their work, which becomes less stressful and more profitable, and may receive social benefits in terms of education or animal-assisted therapy; on the other hand, animals are rewarded by the presence of humans and are not afraid of them. Goats have high cognitive and communicative abilities towards humans: recognising these abilities helps humans to work properly on the quality of this relationship that is built from the first hours of the goat kids’ life, thanks to frequent and positive contacts (e.g., stroking, talking in a calm voice). Improving the quality of this relationship is an investment in the future of livestock farming and meets public demands for ethical and sustainable production. This review outlines the characteristics and predisposing factors for the establishment of a good human–goat relationship and for its evaluation.

Abstract

There is consensus that the quality of the human–animal relationship (HAR) is relevant to guarantee appropriate levels of animal welfare. Given the impact that HAR may have on both goats and human beings, the aim of the present review is to elucidate: (1) how humans and goats communicate; (2) which are the factors affecting human–goat interactions; (3) how we can measure the quality of this relationship. The systematic review led to the selection of 58 relevant articles. Effective human–goat communication takes place by means of visual, tactile and auditory stimuli and, to a less extent, via olfactory and gustative stimuli. Goats have well-developed socio-cognitive abilities and rely on humans to get relevant information. A deep knowledge of goats’ communication means and socio-cognitive abilities may greatly help improving the human–goat relationship. Management practices (e.g., rearing methods, amount and quality of interactions), as well as genetic selection for suitable individual traits, may contribute to improving HAR. Several measures to assess the quality of HAR have been validated, including avoidance in the pen and at the feeding rack and latency to first contact. Finally, farmers’ attitudes and empathy with goats, as well as their motivation to work with animals, should be improved through appropriate training.

Goats (Capra hircus) From Different Selection Lines Differ in Their Behavioural Flexibility

Given that domestication provided animals with more stable environmental conditions, artificial selection by humans has likely affected animals' ability to learn novel contingencies and their ability to adapt to changing environments. In addition, the selection for specific traits in domestic animals might have an additional impact on subjects' behavioural flexibility, but also their general learning performance, due to a re-allocation of resources towards parameters of productivity. To test whether animals bred for high productivity would experience a shift towards lower learning performance, we compared the performance of dwarf goats (not selected for production, 15 subjects) and dairy goats (selected for high milk yield, 18 subjects) in a visual discrimination learning and reversal learning task. Goats were tested individually in a test compartment and were rewarded by choosing either a white or a black cup presented by the experimenter on a sliding board behind a crate. Once they reached a designated learning criterion in the initial learning task, they were transferred to the reversal learning task. To increase the heterogeneity of our test sample, data was collected by two experimenters at two research stations following a similar protocol. Goats of both selection lines did not differ in the initial discrimination learning task in contrast to the subsequent reversal learning task. Dairy goats reached the learning criterion slower compared to dwarf goats (dairy goats = 9.18 sessions; dwarf goats = 7.74 sessions; P = 0.016). Our results may indicate that the selection for milk production might have affected behavioural flexibility in goats. These differences in adapting to changing environmental stimuli might have an impact on animal welfare e.g., when subjects have to adapt to new environments or changes in housing and management routines.

Performance of goats in a detour and a problem-solving test following long-term cognitive test exposure

Cognitive research in long-lived species commonly involves using the same animals in different experiments. It is unclear whether the participation in cognitive tests can notably alter the performance of individuals in subsequent conceptually different tests. We therefore investigated whether exposure to cognitive tests affects future test performance of goats. We used three treatment groups: goats with long-term exposure to human-presented object-choice tests (for visual discrimination and reversal learning tests + cognitive test battery), goats that were isolated as for the test exposure but received a reward from the experimenter without being administered the object-choice tests, and goats that were isolated but neither received a reward nor were administered the tests. All treatment groups were subsequently tested in two conceptually different cognitive tests, namely a spatial A-not-B detour test and an instrumental problem-solving test. We tested dairy goats, selected for high productivity, and dwarf goats, not selected for production traits, each at the same two research sites. We did not find notable differences between treatments with respect to the goats' detour or problem-solving performance. However, high variation was observed between the research sites, the selection lines, and among individuals, highlighting potential pitfalls of making accurate comparisons of cognitive test performances.