Agency Through Design: Behavior-Specific Use Patterns of Horses Across Four Different Turnout Areas in the Netherlands

Résumé fourni par la source

Equine turnout areas are commonly designed to maximize open space. However, research in more naturalistic settings suggests that horses use landscape features selectively. This study examined how horses' spatial use patterns vary across turnout designs with different levels of structural complexity, and whether the use of specific features differs according to behavioral state and time of day. Horses (N = 26) at four Dutch yards (A–D; size range: 6,477 m²–37,489 m²) differing in landscape design were monitored for 10 consecutive days using Hoofstep® GPS–IMU sensors. Behavior was automatically classified into four categories (Eating, Resting, Active, Highly Active). Spatial preprocessing was conducted in Python, with ArcGIS used for cartographic checking, yielding a final dataset of 3,856.50 monitoring hours. Feature selection relative to availability was quantified using Manly's Selection Ratios (MSR). Log-transformed MSR values were analyzed using yard-specific linear mixed models. Landscape features significantly influenced spatial selection across all yards (A: F(12,940) = 98.199, P < 0.001; B: F(7,1460) = 124.663, P < 0.001; C: F(4,273) = 19.326, P < 0.001; D: F(6,498) = 38.691, P < 0.001). Behavior × landscape feature interactions were also significant in all models (all P < 0.001), indicating behavior-specific spatial selection. Significant interactions involving time of day were observed primarily in the more structurally heterogeneous environments. Findings indicate that behavior-specific spatial organization was fundamentally shaped by structural environment. Landscape heterogeneity therefore appears to support behavioral agency by providing horses with functionally distinct spatial options. These findings support landscape design as an important consideration for equine welfare, with potential co-benefits for biodiversity.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.