Effects of Rearing on the Behaviour of Zoo-Housed Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

Spiezio, Caterina; Vaglio, Stefano; Vandelle, Camille; Sandri, Camillo; Regaiolli, Barbara

doi:10.1159/000515127

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 51 publications

(81 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The impacts of zoo visitors can vary between facilities, between enclosures within facilities [11], and even between individual animals [12][13][14]. There are many factors which can impact the valence of the experience of visitors near to animal enclosures, including zoo visitor behaviour, enclosure design, presence or absence of enrichment, past experiences of individuals, and individual rearing history [10,[15][16][17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of COVID-19 Zoo Closures on Behavioural and Physiological Parameters of Welfare in Primates

Williams

Carter

Rendle

et al. 2022

Animals

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Primates are some of the most cognitively advanced species held in zoos, and their interactions with visitors are complex. The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique opportunity to understand the impact of zoo visitors on animals, in comparison to “empty zoos”. This study sought to understand the impact of facility closures and subsequent reopenings on behavioural and physiological parameters of welfare in four primate species housed in the UK: bonobos (Pan paniscus) (n = 8), chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) (n = 11), and western lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla) (n = 6) held at Twycross Zoo (TZ); and olive baboons (Papio anubis) (n = 192) held at Knowsley Safari (KS). Behavioural data were collected from April–September 2020 (KS) and November 2020–January 2021 (TZ). Faecal samples were collected during morning checks from October–November (TZ) and July–November 2020 (KS). Faecal glucocorticoid metabolites (FGMs) were measured using ELISA kits. Statistical analysis for behavioural observations was undertaken using general linear models. Enclosure usage was assessed using t-tests and Mann–Whitney U-tests as appropriate. Bonobos and gorillas spent less time alone when facilities were open to the public (p = 0.004, p = 0.02 respectively). Gorillas spent less time resting when the facility was open to the public (p = 0.04), and chimpanzees engaged in more feeding (p = 0.02) and engagement with enrichment (p = 0.03) when the zoo was open to the public than when it was closed. Olive baboons performed less sexual and dominance behaviour and approached visitor cars more frequently when the safari park was opened to the public than they did the ranger’s vehicle during closure periods. There were no significant changes in physiological parameters for any of the study species. The results suggest variable impacts of the zoo closures on zoo-housed primates. We recommend future work that seeks to understand the impact of individual-level differences on “visitor effects” and that differences between animal experiences in zoos and safari parks are further explored in a range of species.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of COVID-19 Zoo Closures on Behavioural and Physiological Parameters of Welfare in Primates

Williams

Carter

Rendle

et al. 2022

Animals

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are a number of factors that have been identified as predictors of animal responses to humans in zoos, including but not limited to: ecological variables (e.g. habitat type); animal size; animal rearing history; previous experiences and individual animal personality (Davey 2007;Carder & Semple 2008;Choo et al 2011;Queiroz & Young 2018;Sherwen & Hemsworth 2019;Hashmi & Sullivan 2020;Spiezio et al 2021;Hosey et al 2023).…”

Section: Hais/mais In the Zoo Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is a need for a range of interactions between farm staff and animals from the purely observational, such as mobility scoring of cattle, through to physical handling and restraint for procedures such as foot trimming and artificial insemination. All of these interactions may have differing impacts on animals, and these impacts will be affected by numerous factors, including: what the interaction consists of and how the animal perceives that interaction, the housing of the animals (Fanson & Wielebnowski 2013 ), the previous animal-stockperson relationship (Zulkifli 2013 ; Rault et al 2020 ), ontogenetic developmental factors (e.g., previous experience) (Weinberg & Levine 1980 ; Spiezio et al 2021 ) and the predictability of the interaction (Weinberg & Levine 1980 ). Historically, research has focused upon the former factors, with less focus on the predictability of the interaction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

Williams,

Sadler,

Rutter

et al. 2024

Anim. welf.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animals under human care are exposed to a potentially large range of both familiar and unfamiliar humans. Human-animal interactions vary across settings, and individuals, with the nature of the interaction being affected by a suite of different intrinsic and extrinsic factors. These interactions can be described as positive, negative or neutral. Across some industries, there has been a move towards the development of technologies to support or replace human interactions with animals. Whilst this has many benefits, there can also be challenges associated with increased technology use. A day-long Animal Welfare Research Network workshop was hosted at Harper Adams University, UK, with the aim of bringing together stakeholders and researchers (n = 38) from the companion, farm and zoo animal fields, to discuss benefits, challenges and limitations of human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions for animals under human care and create a list of future research priorities. The workshop consisted of four talks from experts within these areas, followed by break-out room discussions. This work is the outcome of that workshop. The key recommendations are that approaches to advancing the scientific discipline of machine-animal interactions in animals under human care should focus on: (1) interdisciplinary collaboration; (2) development of validated methods; (3) incorporation of an animal-centred perspective; (4) a focus on promotion of positive animal welfare states (not just avoidance of negative states); and (5) an exploration of ways that machines can support a reduction in the exposure of animals to negative human-animal interactions to reduce negative, and increase positive, experiences for animals.

show abstract

“…Whilst research across primates and other taxa has shown the adaptability of zoo animals and highlighted their ability to habituate to the presence or absence of zoo visitors [ 5 , 28 , 29 , 30 ], it is widely accepted that zoo visitors have varying impacts on zoo animals. The zoo animal–visitor dynamic is complex and there are a number of factors which are likely to impact the valence of these interactions for zoo animals, including but not limited to, previous experience with zoo visitors, behavioural ecology, individual personality and rearing history, enclosure design, husbandry and presence or absence of enrichment [ 5 , 10 , 20 , 22 , 31 , 32 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Visitors on Non-Primate Species in Zoos: A Quantitative Review

Williams

Hunton

Hosey

et al. 2023

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visitors are a prominent feature in the lives of zoo animals, and their presence can cause a range of impacts on zoo animals (typically classed as positive, negative or neutral impacts), commonly referred to as the ‘visitor effect’. This paper quantitatively collates the literature on the visitor effect in non-primate species, investigates the types of measures used to assess impacts of visitors on animals and considers whether impacts vary across non-primate species in zoos. In total, there were 105 papers which had investigated the impact of zoo visitors on 252 non-primate species/species groups. There has been a steady increase in visitor effect research in zoos since 2012 and this body of work incorporates species from avian (28% study species), reptilian (9%), amphibian (2%), fish (4%) and invertebrate taxa (1%). However, there is still a bias towards mammalian species (56%). The response to visitors varied across taxa. Amphibians responded negatively to visitors more frequently than would be expected by chance (p < 0.05), birds responded neutrally more frequently than would be expected by chance (p < 0.05) and fish responded neutrally and ‘unknown’ more frequently than would be expected by chance (p < 0.05). This review highlighted a number of animal-based metrics which have been used to assess the impacts of visitors on animals, with measures used varying across taxa. Moving forwards, it is recommended that moving forwards researchers incorporate a suite of measures, incorporating those which are meaningful in terms of being representative of individual animal experiences and animal welfare, collected in a manner which should capture those metrics accurately.

show abstract

Effects of Rearing on the Behaviour of Zoo-Housed Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes)

Cited by 6 publications

References 51 publications

The Impact of COVID-19 Zoo Closures on Behavioural and Physiological Parameters of Welfare in Primates

The Impact of COVID-19 Zoo Closures on Behavioural and Physiological Parameters of Welfare in Primates

Human-animal interactions and machine-animal interactions in animals under human care: A summary of stakeholder and researcher perceptions and future directions

The Impact of Visitors on Non-Primate Species in Zoos: A Quantitative Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About