Measuring Welfare through Behavioral Observation and Adjusting It with Dynamic Environments

Watters, Jason V.; Krebs, Bethany L.; Pacheco, Eridia

doi:10.1017/9781108183147.009

Cited by 10 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 89 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That there is often some probability that a physical description of behavior can fall into more than one category can increase the chances of sorting behaviors incorrectly. Animals may pace in their enclosure for more than one reason, for example [84]. Cogent arguments that are grounded in the context of the behavior are essential to parse which category a behavior most likely belongs in.…”

Section: Considering Behavioral Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Animal Welfare with Behavior: Onward with Caution

Watters

Krebs

Eschmann

2021

JZBG

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An emphasis on ensuring animal welfare is growing in zoo and aquarium associations around the globe. This has led to a focus on measures of welfare outcomes for individual animals. Observations and interpretations of behavior are the most widely used outcome-based measures of animal welfare. They commonly serve as a diagnostic tool from which practitioners make animal welfare decisions and suggest treatments, yet errors in data collection and interpretation can lead to the potential for misdiagnosis. We describe the perils of incorrect welfare diagnoses and common mistakes in applying behavior-based tools. The missteps that can be made in behavioral assessment include mismatches between definitions of animal welfare and collected data, lack of alternative explanations, faulty logic, behavior interpreted out of context, murky assumptions, lack of behavior definitions, and poor justification for assigning a welfare value to a specific behavior. Misdiagnosing the welfare state of an animal has negative consequences. These include continued poor welfare states, inappropriate use of resources, lack of understanding of welfare mechanisms and the perpetuation of the previously mentioned faulty logic throughout the wider scientific community. We provide recommendations for assessing behavior-based welfare tools, and guidance for those developing tools and interpreting data.

show abstract

Section: Considering Behavioral Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Animal Welfare with Behavior: Onward with Caution

Watters

Krebs

Eschmann

2021

JZBG

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As we recognize distress is incompatible with positive welfare, we should also recognize that an animal exhibiting a sudden abnormal repetitive behavior in an environment that has not recently changed may still require additional interventions to be able to achieve positive welfare. If the behavior does not have a diagnosable physiological component (e.g., rapid neurological changes due to tumors or illness), conducting a complete assessment of the environment and overall welfare state of the animal can be useful, as animals living in well-provisioned environments may still experience psychological distress contributing to the development of the behavior [ 6 ].…”

Section: Cognitive and Behavioral Changesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Early welfare work focused on eliminating animals’ negative experiences (e.g., freedom from pain [ 3 ]), however in recent years animal welfare science has increasingly focused on the positive well-being of animals [ 4 ]. Moreover, modern animal welfare science acknowledges providing proper environmental provisioning for an animal is necessary but not sufficient for ensuring the positive welfare of each individual of a given species [ 5 , 6 ]. Positive welfare is associated with numerous opportunities including the ability to exert agency in daily life [ 7 , 8 , 9 ], engagement with the environment (e.g., physical and social aspects of one’s world [ 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]), problem solving [ 9 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ], and acquiring rewards [ 22 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Managing Aged Animals in Zoos to Promote Positive Welfare: A Review and Future Directions

Krebs

Marrin

Phelps

et al. 2018

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simple SummaryMany animals experience physical and behavioral changes as they age. Age-related changes in physical or mental ability can limit the opportunities for animals to experience positive well-being. As animals in zoos are living longer than ever, understanding common physical, cognitive, and behavioral changes associated with ageing across species can help inform management practices. This review aggregates information about common age-related changes across a wide number of species, discusses the potential welfare impacts of these changes for ageing animals, and suggests methods for caretakers to maximize positive welfare opportunities for ageing animals under human care.AbstractImprovements in veterinary care, nutrition, and husbandry of animals living in zoos have led to an increase in the longevity of these animals over the past 30 years. In this same time period, the focus of animal welfare science has shifted from concerns over mitigating negative welfare impacts to promoting positive welfare experiences for animals. For instance, providing opportunities for animals to exert agency, solve problems, or acquire rewards are all associated with positive welfare outcomes. Many common age-related changes result in limitations to opportunities for positive welfare experiences, either due to pain or other physical, cognitive, or behavioral limitations. This review aggregates information regarding common age-related physical and behavioral changes across species, discusses how age-related changes may limit positive welfare opportunities of aged animals in human care, and suggests potential management methods to help promote positive welfare for animals at all life stages in zoos and aquariums.

show abstract

“…Physiological indicators are, for example, adrenal hormones, glucocorticoid metabolites, or biochemical and hematological parameters. Physical parameters include coat or body condition scoring, gait parameters, or pedal and dental health [5][6][7][8][9].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Typically, behavioral observations in zoos are carried out using traditional methods through direct observation, either by keepers or biologists manually scoring behavior [9]. Depending on the observed species and the specific research question, different activities (e.g., walking, standing, lying, feeding, social as well as abnormal behaviors) are in the scope of the observation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automated Video-Based Analysis Framework for Behavior Monitoring of Individual Animals in Zoos Using Deep Learning—A Study on Polar Bears

Zuerl

Stoll

Brehm

et al. 2022

Animals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The monitoring of animals under human care is a crucial tool for biologists and zookeepers to keep track of the animals’ physical and psychological health. Additionally, it enables the analysis of observed behavioral changes and helps to unravel underlying reasons. Enhancing our understanding of animals ensures and improves ex situ animal welfare as well as in situ conservation. However, traditional observation methods are time- and labor-intensive, as they require experts to observe the animals on-site during long and repeated sessions and manually score their behavior. Therefore, the development of automated observation systems would greatly benefit researchers and practitioners in this domain. We propose an automated framework for basic behavior monitoring of individual animals under human care. Raw video data are processed to continuously determine the position of the individuals within the enclosure. The trajectories describing their travel patterns are presented, along with fundamental analysis, through a graphical user interface (GUI). We evaluate the performance of the framework on captive polar bears (Ursus maritimus). We show that the framework can localize and identify individual polar bears with an F1 score of 86.4%. The localization accuracy of the framework is 19.9±7.6 cm, outperforming current manual observation methods. Furthermore, we provide a bounding-box-labeled dataset of the two polar bears housed in Nuremberg Zoo.

show abstract

Measuring Welfare through Behavioral Observation and Adjusting It with Dynamic Environments

Cited by 10 publications

References 89 publications

Assessing Animal Welfare with Behavior: Onward with Caution

Assessing Animal Welfare with Behavior: Onward with Caution

Managing Aged Animals in Zoos to Promote Positive Welfare: A Review and Future Directions

Automated Video-Based Analysis Framework for Behavior Monitoring of Individual Animals in Zoos Using Deep Learning—A Study on Polar Bears

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About