Within-group differences in captive Diana monkey (Cercopithecus diana diana) behaviour

Abstract

This case study examines the activity budgets of captive Diana monkeys (Cercopithecus diana diana) and discusses results in the context of what is known regarding captive and wild-type behaviour in this species and other guenons. The activities of a family group of Diana monkeys (two parents and four offspring) housed at Edinburgh Zoo, UK, were quantified using a 5-min interval scan sampling technique. The 5100 observation points collected showed that the subjects spent the largest proportion of their time observing (approx. 46%), followed by feeding (approx. 15%), playing (approx. 11%), mutual grooming (approx. 8%) and resting (approx. 7%). The daily activity budgets for each of the subjects were tallied and, at the end of the 10-day observation period, used to produce a data matrix consisting of nine behaviour variables per subject. Clear among-individual differences in activity were identified with canonical discriminant function analysis. This multivariate approach illustrated how the combined behaviours of the parent male were distinct from those of the rest of the family group. Within the remainder of the group, the three youngest offspring displayed similar activity budgets, whereas the overall behaviour of the eldest offspring (a female) was between that of its siblings and her mother.

Visitor effects on zoo-housed Sulawesi crested macaque (Macaca nigra) behaviour: Can signs with ‘watching eyes’ requesting quietness help?

“…This corresponds to findings from numerous other studies (Davey, 2007). Specifically, activity increased with increased visitor numbers (Todd et al, 2007), visitor activity (Hosey and Druck, 1987;Mitchell et al, 1992) and visitor presence (Mallapur et al, 2005). However, this effect is not consistent across species; for example, western lowland gorillas significantly reduced foraging and feeding with increasing visitor numbers (Clark et al, 2012).…”

“…Some studies have found increases in auto-grooming similar to the current study, e.g. in western lowland gorillas grooming increased with visitor density (Wells, 2005), but in other species, such as Diana monkeys, grooming behaviours decreases with increased visitor numbers (Todd et al, 2007).…”

“…Even so, visitor noise had less of an effect on the macaque groups than visitor number, but three active-type behaviours (foraging, furniture use, and play) increased with increasing noise level. Increases in foraging and play behaviours have been observed previously in primates; Todd et al (2007) saw increases in both behaviours with visitor group size in Diana monkeys, while increases in foraging and play was observed in both olive baboons Papio anubis) and gorillas with visitor number and noise level (Snider, 2016). It is not clear what increases in these seemingly positive active type behaviours, such as play, may mean in terms of welfare (Held and Špinka, 2011;Ahloy-Dallaire et al in press, 2017).…”

“…The hypothesised decrease in relaxed-type behaviours with higher visitor numbers was only seen for resting and social huddling, as auto-grooming increased with higher visitor numbers. Previous studies have found that resting behaviour decreases in western lowland gorillas with high visitor density (Wells, 2005), and in Diana monkeys with increased visitor number (Todd et al, 2007).…”

“…One of the more frequently studied visitor-variables has been visitor number, which has consistently been shown to affect the behaviour of zoo-housed primates. For example, in Diana monkeys (Cercopithecus diana) visitor group size displayed a positive correlation with frequency of active-type behaviours, such as foraging or playing, and a negative relationship with relaxed behaviours, such as resting, sleeping or grooming (Todd et al, 2007). In male white handed gibbons (Hylobates lar) larger visitor group sizes resulted in increases in communicative behaviours interpreted as responses to threats, such as 'look at mate', 'look at visitors' and open mouth displays (Cooke and Schillaci, 2007).…”