FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Animal cognition2025; 28(1); 8; doi: 10.1007/s10071-025-01933-6

Antipredator behaviour in semi-feral horses: innate response and the influence of external factors.

Abstract: Rewilding can play a vital role in safeguarding biodiversity, with the grazing pressure exerted by large ungulates and controlled by their predators being a significant factor, particularly in European contexts. Domestic horses are becoming integral to such ungulates' biomass, but they may differ from truly wild species due to their domesticated origin. This raises concerns about whether feral horses retain adequate antipredator behaviours, especially in the presence of expanding, large predators like wolves. The field of antipredator behaviour research is hampered by inconsistent results and a lack of standardisation, and the behaviour of free-ranging horses remains underexplored. To address this gap, we conducted a playback experiment on semi-feral Exmoor ponies (n = 97) in the Czech Republic, exposing them to wolf howls, deer rut calls, and static noise as a control. We assessed alert behaviour and herd grouping while accounting for variables such as herd size, sex, time of day, weather conditions, environment type, presence of other ungulates, and habituation effects. Over 70% of the ponies exhibited alert behaviour in response to both wolf and deer calls. Although the magnitude of responses did not differ significantly between wolf and deer calls, both elicited distinct reactions compared to the control. Most of the studied external factors significantly affected the observed alert responses, highlighting that they must be carefully considered in such studies since these may explain the conflicting results observed in previous studies. The significant behavioural differences in reaction to the sounds indicate that the horses can differentiate them and likely still possess some innate memory, as reported in other ungulates. This is a positive sign towards reintroduction. Future research should carefully consider the validity of the testing environment, habituation effects, and other external factors to ensure robust results.
© 2025. The Author(s).
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2025-02-04 PubMed ID: 39903312PubMed Central: PMC11794347DOI: 10.1007/s10071-025-01933-6Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article explores the anti-predator behaviours exhibited by semi-feral horses, with a focus on the influence of various external factors and the potential ability of these horses to differentiate between threat sounds. The researchers conducted an experiment using sound playbacks of predators and observed the response behaviour of the horses.

Objectives and Methodology of the Research

  • The researchers aimed to examine whether semi-feral horses retain adequate anti-predator behaviours and how external variables influence these behaviours. This is explored through an experiment observing the horses’ reactions to predator sounds.
  • The study involved semi-feral Exmoor ponies located in the Czech Republic. The experiment involved playing sounds mimicking wolf howls, deer rut calls, and static noise as a control measure.
  • The alerted behaviours and herd grouping responses of the horses were assessed, with factors such as herd size, sex of the horse, time of day, weather conditions, type of environment, presence of other ungulates, and effects of habituation taken into account.

Key Findings of the Research

  • Seventy percent of the ponies showed alert behaviour in response to the sounds of wolf howls and deer calls, demonstrating their innate reaction to predators.
  • The horses did not differentiate significantly in their responses to the wolf and deer sounds, but their reactions to these sounds contrasted with their response to the control sound.
  • The research highlighted that all the external variables examined notably influenced the horses’ alert behaviours. The researchers suggest that such external factors could explain the varied and inconsistent results in prior studies on this topic.
  • The study found that horses could differentiate between the different types of sounds, which suggests they retain some innate memory. This ability could facilitate their integration into the wild.

Implications and Recommendations for Future Research

  • These findings signal a positive direction for reintroducing semi-domesticated horses into the wild, as the presence of an innate memory and their interestingly different behavior towards predator sounds suggest that they may adapt well.
  • The research advises future studies to carefully consider external variables such as the testing environment, potential habituation effects, and other imprudent factors to obtain sturdy and reliable results. This aids in mitigating the inconsistent results and lack of standardization that currently hamper the research field of antipredator behaviour.

Cite This Article

APA
Bercy A, Ceacero F, Komárková M. (2025). Antipredator behaviour in semi-feral horses: innate response and the influence of external factors. Anim Cogn, 28(1), 8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-025-01933-6

Publication

Animal cognition
ISSN: 1435-9456
NlmUniqueID: 9814573
Country: Germany
Language: English
Volume: 28
Issue: 1
Pages: 8
PII: 8

Researcher Affiliations

Bercy, Antoine
  • Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Ceacero, Francisco
  • Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00, Prague, Czech Republic.
Komárková, Martina
  • Faculty of Tropical AgriSciences, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 00, Prague, Czech Republic. komarkova@ftz.czu.cz.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Horses
  • Male
  • Female
  • Deer / physiology
  • Czech Republic
  • Vocalization, Animal
  • Wolves
  • Predatory Behavior
  • Animals, Wild
  • Behavior, Animal

Conflict of Interest Statement

Declarations. Ethical approval: No direct contact with the animals was required during the study. Recording frequencies were designed to minimise the stress of the animals. We declare that all experiments, experimental protocols, and methods align with the Czech law No. 246/1992 Coll. (the Protection of Animals Against Cruelty), the ethical rules of the Czech University of Life Sciences Prague and current guidelines for the ethical use of animals in research (ASAB Ethical Committee/ABS Animal Care Committee 2024). Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

References

This article includes 38 references
  1. Adcock SJJ, Tucker CB. Naïve domestic Bos taurus calves recognize the scent of a canine predator.. Anim Behav 2020 164:173–180.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2020.04.009google scholar: lookup
  2. Apfelbach R, Blanchard CD, Blanchard RJ, Hayes RA, McGregor IS. The effects of predator odors in mammalian prey species: a review of field and laboratory studies.. Neurosci Biobehav R 2005 29:1123–1144.
    pubmed: 16085312doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2005.05.005google scholar: lookup
  3. ASAB Ethical Committee/ABS Animal Care Committee. Guidelines for the ethical treatment of nonhuman animals in behavioural research and teaching.. Anim Behav 2024 207:I-XI.
    doi: 10.1016/s0003-3472(23)00317-2google scholar: lookup
  4. Berger J, Gompper ME. Sex ratios in extant ungulates: products of contemporary predation or past life. Histories?. J Mammal 1999 80:1084–1113.
    doi: 10.2307/1383162google scholar: lookup
  5. Berger J, Swenson JE, Persson IL. Recolonizing carnivores and Naïve Prey: Conservation lessons from Pleistocene extinctions.. Science 2001 291:1036–1039.
    pubmed: 11161215doi: 10.1126/science.1056466google scholar: lookup
  6. Bernátková A, Oyunsaikhan G, Šimek J, Komárková M, Bobek M, Ceacero F. Influence of weather on the behaviour of reintroduced Przewalski’s horses in the great Gobi B strictly protected Area (Mongolia): implications for conservation.. BMC Zool 2022 7:32.
    pmc: PMC10127430pubmed: 37170378doi: 10.1186/s40850-022-00130-zgoogle scholar: lookup
  7. Carrasco MF, Blumstein DT. Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) respond to yellow-bellied marmot (Marmota flaviventris) alarm calls.. Ethology 2012 118:243–250.
    doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0310.2011.02002.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  8. Carthey AJ, Blumstein DT. Predicting predator recognition in a changing world.. Trends Ecol Evol 2018 33:106–115.
    pubmed: 29132776doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2017.10.009google scholar: lookup
  9. Chapron G, Kaczensky P, Linnell JDC, Boitani L. Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes.. Science 2014 346:1517–1519.
    pubmed: 25525247doi: 10.1126/science.1257553google scholar: lookup
  10. Christensen JW, Rundgren M. Predator odour per se does not frighten domestic horses.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2008 112:136–145.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2007.08.003google scholar: lookup
  11. Creel S, Schuette P, Christianson D. Effects of predation risk on group size, vigilance, and foraging behavior in an African ungulate community.. Behav Ecol 2014 25:773–784.
    doi: 10.1093/beheco/aru050google scholar: lookup
  12. Dröge E, Creel S, Becker MS, M’Soka J. Risky times and risky places interact to affect prey behaviour.. Nat Ecol Evol 2017 1:1123–1128.
    pubmed: 29046564doi: 10.1038/s41559-017-0220-9google scholar: lookup
  13. Dvorský M, Mudrák O, Doležal J, Jirků M. Reintroduction of large herbivores restored plant species richness in abandoned dry temperate grassland.. Plant Ecol 2022 223:525–535.
    doi: 10.1007/s11258-022-01225-wgoogle scholar: lookup
  14. Feh C, Boldsukh T, Tourenq C. Are family groups in equids a response to cooperative hunting by predators? The case of Mongolian Kulans (Equus hemionus luteus Matschie).. Revue d’Écologie 1994 49(1):11–20.
  15. Garrido P, Mårell A, Öckinger E, Skarin A, Jansson A, Thulin CG. Experimental rewilding enhances grassland functional composition and pollinator habitat use.. J Appl Ecol 2019 56:946–955.
    doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13338google scholar: lookup
  16. Hartmann E, Søndergaard E, Keeling LJ. Keeping horses in groups: a review.. Appl Anim Behav Sci 2012 136(2–4):77–87.
    doi: 10.1016/j.applanim.2011.10.004google scholar: lookup
  17. Janczarek I, Wiśniewska A, Chruszczewski MH, Tkaczyk E, Górecka-Bruzda A. Social Behaviour of horses in response to Vocalisations of predators.. Animals 2020 10:2331.
    pmc: PMC7764477pubmed: 33302443doi: 10.3390/ani10122331google scholar: lookup
  18. Janczarek I, Stachurska A, Kędzierski W, Wiśniewska A, Ryżak M, Kozioł A. The intensity of physiological and behavioral responses of horses to predator vocalisations.. BMC Vet Res 2020 16:431.
    pmc: PMC7653799pubmed: 33167961doi: 10.1186/s12917-020-02643-6google scholar: lookup
  19. Janczarek I, Stachurska A, Kędzierski W, Pawlak EW, Wilk I, Zyglewska K, Paszkowska A, Ryżak M, Wiśniewska A. Heart rate variability in Konik and purebred arabian horses in response to different predator vocalisations.. Animal 2021 15:100045.
    pubmed: 33516023doi: 10.1016/j.animal.2020.100045google scholar: lookup
  20. Kershenbaum A, Root-Gutteridge H, Habib B, Koler-Matznick J, Mitchell B, Palacios V, Waller S. Disentangling canid howls across multiple species and subspecies: structure in a complex communication channel.. Behav Process 2016 124:149–157.
    pubmed: 26809021doi: 10.1016/j.beproc.2016.01.006google scholar: lookup
  21. Kuijper DPJ, Verwijmeren M, Churski M, Zbyryt A, Schmidt K, Jedrzejewska B, Smit C. What cues do ungulates use to assess predation risk in dense temperate forests?. PLoS ONE 2014 9(1):e84607.
    pmc: PMC3880296pubmed: 24404177doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084607google scholar: lookup
  22. Li C, Yang X, Ding Y, Zhang L, Fang H, Tang S, Jiang Z. Do Père David’s deer lose Memories of their Ancestral predators?. PLoS ONE 2011 6:e23623.
    pmc: PMC3160898pubmed: 21887286doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0023623google scholar: lookup
  23. Lundgren EJ, Ramp D, Middleton OS, Wooster EI, Kusch E, Balisi M, Wallach AD. A novel trophic cascade between cougars and feral donkeys shapes desert wetlands.. J Anim Ecol 2022 91:2348–2357.
    pmc: PMC10087508pubmed: 35871769doi: 10.1111/1365-2656.13766google scholar: lookup
  24. Marucco F, Reinhardt I, Avanzinelli E, Zimmermann F, Manz R, Potočnik H, Černe R, Rauer G, Walter T, Knauer F, Chapron G, Duchamp C. Transboundary monitoring of the Wolf Alpine Population over 21 years and seven countries.. Animals 2023 13:3551.
    pmc: PMC10668717pubmed: 38003168doi: 10.3390/ani13223551/s1google scholar: lookup
  25. McGregor PK. Playback experiments: design and analysis.. Acta Ethol 2000 3:3–8.
    doi: 10.1007/s102110000023google scholar: lookup
  26. Miller RM. The unique perceptivity of the horse.. J Equine Vet Sci 1995 15:220–222.
    doi: 10.1016/s0737-0806(07)80460-6google scholar: lookup
  27. Olson ER, Van Deelen TR, Ventura SJ. Variation in anti-predator behaviors of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) in a multi-predator system.. Can J Zool 2019 97:1030–1041.
    doi: 10.1139/cjz-2018-0254google scholar: lookup
  28. Palmer MS, Fieberg J, Swanson A, Kosmala M, Packer C. A ‘dynamic’ landscape of fear: prey responses to spatiotemporal variations in predation risk across the lunar cycle.. Ecol Lett 2017 20:1364–1373.
    pubmed: 28901034doi: 10.1111/ele.12832google scholar: lookup
  29. Passilongo D, Reby D, Carranza J, Apollonio M. Roaring high and low: composition and possible functions of the Iberian stag’s vocal repertoire.. PloS ONE 2013 8(5):e63841.
    pmc: PMC3648515pubmed: 23667678doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063841google scholar: lookup
  30. Prugh LR, Sivy KJ, Mahoney PJ, Ganz TR, Ditmer MA, van de Kerk M, Gilbert SL, Montgomery RA. Designing studies of predation risk for improved inference in Carnivore-ungulate systems.. Biol Conserv 2019 232:194–207.
    doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.02.011google scholar: lookup
  31. Quinn JL, Cresswell W. Predator hunting behaviour and prey vulnerability.. J Anim Ecol 2004 73:143–154.
    doi: 10.1046/j.0021-8790.2004.00787.xgoogle scholar: lookup
  32. Ripple WJ, Estes JA, Beschta RL, Wilmers CC, Ritchie EG, Hebblewhite M, Berger J, Elmhagen B, Letnic M, Nelson MP, Schmitz OJ, Smith DW, Wallach AD, Wirsing AJ. Status and ecological effects of the world’s largest carnivores.. Science 2014 343:6167.
    pubmed: 24408439doi: 10.1126/science.1241484google scholar: lookup
  33. Rogers CW, Gee EK, Dittmer KE. Growth and bone development in the horse: when is a horse skeletally mature?. Animals 2021 11:3402.
    pmc: PMC8698045pubmed: 34944179doi: 10.3390/ani11123402google scholar: lookup
  34. Saltz D, Rubenstein DI. Population dynamics of a Reintroduced Asiatic Wild Ass (Equus hemionus) herd.. Ecol Appl 1995 5:327–335.
    doi: 10.2307/1942025google scholar: lookup
  35. Šandlová K, Komárková M, Ceacero F. Daddy, daddy cool: stallion–foal relationships in a socially-natural herd of Exmoor ponies.. Anim Cog 2020 23:781–793.
    pubmed: 32335767doi: 10.1007/s10071-020-01388-xgoogle scholar: lookup
  36. Shrader AM, Brown JS, Kerley GIH, Kotler BP. Do free-ranging domestic goats show ‘landscapes of fear’? Patch use in response to habitat features and predator cues.. J Arid Environ 2008 72:1811–1819.
    doi: 10.1016/j.jaridenv.2008.05.004google scholar: lookup
  37. Watts ET, Johnson CN, Carver S, Butler C, Harvey AM, Cameron EZ. Maternal protectiveness in feral horses: responses to intraspecific and interspecific sources of risk.. Anim Behav 2020 159:1–11.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2019.10.018google scholar: lookup
  38. Winnie J, Creel S. Sex-specific behavioural responses of elk to spatial and temporal variation in the threat of wolf predation.. Anim Behav 2007 73(1):215–225.
    doi: 10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.07.007google scholar: lookup

Citations

This article has been cited 0 times.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,970 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.