Decision-making under risk and ambiguity in low-birth-weight pigs.

Low birth weight (LBW) in humans is a risk factor for later cognitive, behavioural and emotional problems. In pigs, LBW is associated with higher mortality, but little is known about consequences for surviving piglets. Alteration in hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function in LBW pigs suggests altered emotionality, but no behavioural indicators have been studied. Decision-making under uncertain conditions, e.g., risk or ambiguity, is susceptible to emotional influences and may provide a means of assessing long-term effects of LBW in piglets. We tested LBW (N = 8) and normal-birth-weight (NBW; N = 8) male pigs in two decision-making tasks. For decision-making under risk, we developed a simple two-choice probabilistic task, the Pig Gambling Task (PGT), where an 'advantageous' option offered small but frequent rewards and a 'disadvantageous' option offered large but infrequent rewards. The advantageous option offered greater overall gain. For decision-making under ambiguity, we used a Judgement Bias Task (JBT) where pigs were trained to make an active response to 'positive' and 'negative' tone cues (signalling large and small rewards, respectively). Responses to ambiguous tone cues were rated as more or less optimistic. LBW pigs chose the advantageous option more often in later blocks of the PGT, and were scored as less optimistic in the JBT, than NBW pigs. Our findings demonstrate that LBW pigs have developed different behavioural strategies with respect to decision-making. We propose that this is guided by changes in emotionality in LBW piglets, and we provide behavioural evidence of increased negative affect in LBW piglets.

Successive and conditional discrimination learning in pigs.

We studied the ability of pigs to discriminate tone cues using successive and conditional discrimination tasks. Pigs (n = 8) were trained in a successive discrimination Go/No-Go task (Experiment 1) to associate a Go-cue with a reward at the end of a runway and a No-Go-cue with the absence of reward. Latency to reach the goal-box was recorded for each cue-type. Learning of a conditional discrimination task was compared between low-birthweight (LBW, n = 5) and normal-birthweight (NBW, n = 6) pigs (Experiment 2) and between conventional farm (n = 7) and Göttingen miniature (n = 8) pigs (Experiment 3). In this active-choice task, one cue signalled a response in a right goal-box was correct and a second cue signalled a response in a left goal-box was correct. Cues were differentially rewarded. The number of sessions to learn the discrimination and number of correct choices per cue-type were recorded. In Experiment 1, four out of eight pigs showed learning on the task, that is, a higher latency to respond to the No-Go-cue, within 25 sessions. In Experiment 2, eight out of 11 pigs learned the discrimination within 46 sessions. LBW learners learned faster than NBW learners. In Experiment 3, all 15 pigs learned the task within 16 sessions. Göttingen miniature pigs learned faster than conventional farm pigs. While some methodological issues may improve the Go/No-Go design, it is suggested that an active-choice task yields clearer and more consistent results than one relying on latency alone.