Cues and mechanisms for lateral exposure preference in the common eland (Taurotragus oryx)

Knowledge of lateralized brain function can contribute to animal welfare

The specialized functions of each hemisphere of the vertebrate brain are summarized together with the current evidence of lateralized behavior in farm and companion animals, as shown by the eye or ear used to attend and respond to stimuli. Forelimb preference is another manifestation of hemispheric lateralization, as shown by differences in behavior between left- and right-handed primates, left- and right-pawed dogs and cats, and left- and right-limb-preferring horses. Left-limb preference reflects right hemisphere use and is associated with negative cognitive bias. Positive cognitive bias is associated with right-limb and left-hemisphere preferences. The strength of lateralization is also associated with behavior. Animals with weak lateralization of the brain are unable to attend to more than one task at a time, and they are more easily stressed than animals with strong lateralization. This difference is also found in domesticated species with strong vs. weak limb preferences. Individuals with left-limb or ambilateral preference have a bias to express functions of the right hemisphere, heightened fear and aggression, and greater susceptibility to stress. Recognition of lateralized behavior can lead to improved welfare by detecting those animals most likely to suffer fear and distress and by indicating housing conditions and handling procedures that cause stress.

Visual lateralization in artiodactyls: A brief summary of research and new evidence on saiga antelope

The visual system and lifestyle characteristics make the even-toed ungulates an excellent model for the studies of behavioural lateralization. Recent research has focused on these mammals providing evidence of lateralization in a wide range of behaviours. This provides an opportunity for the collation of the current theoretical assumptions and the existing empirical evidence for visual lateralization in artiodactyls. In the present study, we aim first to gain a fuller picture of hemispheric specializations in saiga antelopes by investigating the lateralization of vigilance and novel object inspection in the wild. Second, we summarized the results of the research into visual lateralization in even-toed ungulates and attempted to assess the applicability of two popular hypotheses about the division of hemispheric roles. The results on saigas show a significant preference for head turns to the right visual field during vigilance which was more robust in individuals in larger groups. When an unfamiliar artificial object was placed in their natural setting, saigas preferentially viewed it predominantly with the right eye. These results, together with the cumulative evidence in artiodactyls, do not follow either the approach-withdrawal or positivity-negativity dichotomous patterns widely used to explain the division of functions between the hemispheres.

Differential roles of the right and left brain hemispheres in the social interactions of a free-ranging ungulate

Despite the abundant empirical evidence on lateralized social behaviours, a clear understanding of the relative roles of two brain hemispheres in social processing is still lacking. This study investigated visual lateralization in social interactions of free-ranging European bison (Bison bonasus). The bison were more likely to display aggressive responses (such as fight and side hit), when they viewed the conspecific with the right visual field, implicating the left brain hemisphere. In contrast, the responses associated with positive social interactions (female-to-calf bonding, calf-to-female approach, suckling) or aggression inhibition (fight termination) occurred more likely when the left visual field was in use, indicating the right hemisphere advantage. The results do not support either assumptions of right-hemisphere dominance for control of various social functions or hypotheses about simple positive (approach) versus negative (withdrawal) distinction between the hemispheric roles. The discrepancy between the studies suggests that in animals, the relative roles of the hemispheres in social processing may be determined by a fine balance of emotions and motivations associated with the particular social reaction difficult to categorize for a human investigator. Our findings highlight the involvement of both brain hemispheres in the control of social behaviour.

What do wild saiga antelopes tell us about the relative roles of the two brain hemispheres in social interactions?

Two brain hemispheres are unequally involved in the processing of social stimuli, as demonstrated in a wide range of vertebrates. A considerable number of studies have shown the right hemisphere advantage for social processing. At the same time, an approach-withdrawal hypothesis, mainly based on experimental evidence, proposes the involvement of both brain hemispheres according to approach and withdrawal motivation. The present study aimed to test the relative roles of the two hemispheres in social responses displayed in a natural context. Visual biases, implicating hemispheric lateralization, were estimated in the social interactions of saiga antelope in the wild. In individually identified males, the left/right visual field use during approach and withdrawal responses was recorded based on the lateral head/body position, relative to the conspecific. Lateralized approach responses were investigated in three types of interactions, with left visual field bias found for chasing a rival, no bias-for attacking a rival, and right visual field bias-for pursuing a female. In two types of withdrawal responses, left visual field bias was found for retreating after fighting, while no bias was evident in fight rejecting. These findings demonstrate that neither the right hemisphere advantage nor the approach-withdrawal distinction can fully explain the patterns of lateralization observed in social behaviour. It is clear that both brain hemispheres play significant roles in social responses, while their relative contribution is likely determined by a complex set of motivational and emotional factors rather than a simple dichotomous distinction such as, for example, approach versus withdrawal motivation.