Animal Cognition

, Volume 12, Issue 1, pp 75–84 | Cite as

Mule cognition: a case of hybrid vigour?

  • Leanne Proops
  • Faith Burden
  • Britta OsthausEmail author
Original Paper


This study compares the behaviour of the mule (Equus asinus × Equus caballus) with that of its parent species to assess the effects of hybridization on cognition. Six mules, six ponies (E. caballus) and six donkeys (E. asinus) were given a two choice visual discrimination learning task. Each session consisted of 12 trials and pass level was reached when subjects chose the correct stimulus for at least 9 out of the 12 trials in three consecutive sessions. A record was made of how many pairs each subject learnt over 25 sessions. The mules’ performance was significantly better than that of either of the parent species (Kruskal-Wallis: Hx = 8.11, P = 0.017). They were also the only group to learn enough pairs to be able to show a successive reduction in the number of sessions required to reach criterion level. This study provides the first empirical evidence that the improved characteristics of mules may be extended from physical attributes to cognitive function.


Cognition Discrimination learning Heterosis Horse Mule 



This experiment complies with the United Kingdom Home Office regulations concerning animal research and welfare as well as the University of Exeter regulations on the use of animals. We are grateful to the members of staff at The Donkey Sanctuary’s Town Barton farm for their support and willingness to facilitate this project. For comments on the manuscript we thank Karen McComb.


  1. Bentley DR, Hoy RR (1972) Genetic control of the neuronal network generating cricket Teleogryllus gryllus song patterns. Anim Behav 20:478–492PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cooper JJ (2007) Equine learning behaviour: Common knowledge and systematic research. Behav Processes 76:24–26PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Field A (2005) Discovering statistics using SPSS, 2nd edn. Sage, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Fiske JC, Potter GD (1979) Discrimination reversal learning in yearling horses. J Anim Sci 49:583–588Google Scholar
  5. Gardner LP (1937) The responses of horses in a discrimination problem. J Comp Psychol 23:13–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Goodwin D (2007) Equine learning behaviour: what we know, what we don’t and future research priorities. Behav Processes 76:17–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goodwin D, Bradshaw JWS, Wickens SM (1997) Paedomorphosis affects agonistic visual signals of domestic dogs. Anim Behav 53:297–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hall CA, Cassaday HJ, Derrington AM (2003) The effect of stimulus height on visual discrimination in horses. J Anim Sci 81:1715–1720PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Harlow HF (1949) The formation of learning sets. Psychol Rev 56:51–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heitor F, Vicente L (2007) Learning about horses: what is equine learning all about? Behav Processes 76:34–36PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hemmings A, McBride SD, Hale CE (2007) Perseverative responding and the aetiology of equine oral stereotypy. Appl Anim Behav Sci 104:143–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kamil AC, Hunter MW (1970) Performance on object-discrimination learning set by Greater Hill Mynah (Gracula religiosa). J Comp Physiol Psychol 73:68–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kamil AC, Jones TB, Pietrewicz A, Maudlin JE (1977) Positive transfer from successive reversal training to learning set in blue jays (Cyanocitta cristata). J Comp Physiol Psychol 91:79–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Krueger K, Heinze J (2008) Horse sense: social status of horses (Equus caballus) affects their likelihood of copying other horses’ behaviour. Anim Cogn. doi: 10.1007/s10071-007-0133-0
  15. Lassalle JM, Bulmanfleming B, Wahlsten D (1991) Hybrid vigor and maternal environment in mice. 2. Water escape learning, open-field activity and spatial memory. Behav Processes 23:35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lefebvre L, Helder R (1997) Scrounger numbers and the inhibition of social learning in pigeons. Behav Processes 40:201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Leil TA, Ossadtchi A, Cortes JS, Leahy RM, Smith DJ (2002) Finding new candidate genes for learning and memory. J Neurosci Res 68:127–137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Linklater WL (2007) Equine learning in a wider context-opportunities for integrative pluralism. Behav Processes 76:53–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Macphail EM (1982) Brain and intelligence in vertebrates. Clarenden Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  20. Maros K, Gácsi M, Miklósi Á (2008) Comprehension of human pointing gestures in horses (Equus caballus). Anim Cogn. doi: 10.1007/s10071-008-0136-5
  21. McFarland D (1999) Animal behaviour. Pearson Education, Harlow, EssexGoogle Scholar
  22. Miklosi A, Kubinyi E, Topal J, Gacsi M, Viranyi Z, Csanyi V (2003) A simple reason for a big difference: wolves do not look back at humans, but dogs do. Curr Biol 13:763–766PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mingroni MA (2004) The secular rise in IQ: giving heterosis a closer look. Intelligence 32:65–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Moritz RFA (1988) A reevaluation of the two-locus model for hygenic behaviour in honeybees (Apis mellifera L.). J Hered 79:257–262Google Scholar
  25. Murphy J, Arkins S (2007) Equine learning behaviour. Behav Processes 76:1–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nicol CJ (2002) Equine learning: progress and suggestions for future research. Appl Anim Behav Sci 78:193–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Owen EH, Logue SF, Rasmussen DL, Wehner JM (1997) Assessment of learning by the Morris water task and fear conditioning in inbred mouse strains and F-1 hybrids: implications of genetic background for single gene mutations and quantitative trait loci analyses. Neuroscience 80:1087–1099PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Page B, Goldsworthy SD, Hindell MA (2001) Vocal traits of hybrid fur seals: intermediate to their parental species. Anim Behav 61:959–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Parker ST, Maynard-Smith J (1990) Optimality theory in evolutionary biology. Nature 348:27–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Parker M, Redhead ES, Goodwin D, McBride SD (2008) Impaired instrumental choice in crib-biting horses (Equus caballus). Behav Brain Res 191:137–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Passingham RE (1981) Primate specializations in brain and intelligence. Symp Zool Soc Lond 46:361–388Google Scholar
  32. Pearce JM (1997) Animal learning and cognition, 2nd edn. Psychology Press, Hove, UKGoogle Scholar
  33. Rothenbuler WC (1964) Behaviour genetics of nest cleaning in honeybees I. Responses of four in-bred lines to disease-killed brood. Anim Behav 12:578–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sappington BF, Goldman L (1994) Discrimination learning and concept formation in the Arabian horse. J Anim Sci 72:3080–3087PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Sappington BKF, McCall CA, Coleman DA, Kuhlers DL, Lishak RS (1997) A preliminary study of the relationship between discrimination reversal learning and performance tasks in yearling and 2-year old horses. Appl Anim Behav Sci 53:157–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Scroggiel MP, Littlejohn MJ (2005) Territorial vocal behaviour in hybrid smooth froglets, Geocrinia laevis complex (Anura: Myobatrachidae). Behav Ecol Sociobiol 58:72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shettleworth SJ (1998) Cognition evolution, and behaviour. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Shull GH (1908) The composition of a field of maize. American Breeder’s Association, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  39. Siegel S, Castellan NJ (1988) Nonparametric statistics for the behavioural sciences, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  40. Travis L (1990) The mule. J. A. Allen & Co, LondonGoogle Scholar
  41. Voith VL (1975) Pattern discrimination, learning set formation, memory retention, spatial and visual reversal learning in the horse. MSc thesis, Ohio State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  42. Waring G (2003) Horse Behaviour, 2nd edn. Noyes Publishing/William Andrew Publishing, Norwich, NYGoogle Scholar
  43. Warren JM (1965) Primate learning in comparative perspective. In: Shrier AM, Harlow HF, Stollnittz F (eds) Behaviour of nonhuman primates. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  44. Winston HD (1964) Heterosis + learning in mouse. J Comp Physiol Psychol 57:279PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of SussexBrightonUK
  2. 2.Research Office, The Donkey SanctuaryDevonUK
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyCanterbury Christ Church UniversityCanterburyUK

Personalised recommendations