Search

Concerns about animal welfare increasingly shape people’s views about the acceptability of keeping animals for food production, biomedical research, and in zoos. The field of animal welfare science has developed over the past 50 years as a method of investigating these concerns via research that assesses how living in human-controlled environments influences the behavior, health and affective states of animals. Initially, animal welfare research focused on animals in agricultural settings, but the field has expanded to zoos because good animal welfare is essential to zoos’ mission of promoting connections between animals and visitors and raising awareness of conservation issues. A particular challenge for zoos is ensuring good animal welfare for long-lived, highly social species like elephants. Our main goal in conducting an epidemiological study of African (Loxodonta africana) and Asian (Elephas maximus) elephant welfare in 68 accredited North American zoos was to understand the prevalence of welfare indicators in the population and determine the aspects of an elephant’s zoo environment, social life and management that are most important to prevent and reduce a variety of welfare problems. In this overview, we provide a summary of the findings of the nine papers in the collection titled: Epidemiological Investigations of North American Zoo Elephant Welfare with a focus on the life history, social, housing, and management factors found to be associated with particular aspects of elephant welfare, including the performance of abnormal behavior, foot and joint problems, recumbence, walking rates, and reproductive health issues. Social and management factors were found to be important for multiple indicators of welfare, while exhibit space was found to be less influential than expected. This body of work results from the largest prospective zoo-based animal welfare study conducted to date and sets in motion the process of using science-based welfare benchmarks to optimize care of zoo elephants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research on pro-social rat behaviour is growing within the fields of comparative psychology and social neuroscience. However, much work remains on mapping important variables influencing this behaviour, and there is even disagreement on whether this behaviour is empathetically motivated and correctly labelled pro-social, or whether the behaviour is motivated by social contact. The present study used the helping behaviour paradigm where a rat can release a familiar cagemate from a restrainer. Prior to testing with a trapped cagemate, restrainer door opening was trained and baseline opening latencies when the restrainer was empty or baited with food were established. The findings show that the first-time release occurred sooner than in previous research and that rats used a previously demonstrated response to release the trapped cagemate. Further, rats opened the restrainer door more often and with shorter latencies when the restrainer contained a cagemate than when the restrainer was empty, but less often and with longer latencies than when the restrainer contained food. The test of whether illumination levels affect door-opening included in the study showed no effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The entrance of new males into non-human primate groups bears high social risk, yet migration is necessary to prevent inbreeding. Males are not always accepted in their new group. In the wild, males may increase the likelihood of successful group entry by choosing a new group based on their own and the group’s characteristics. Understanding whether these characteristics also determine a male’s ability to enter captive groups is crucial to improve introduction management. This study aims to identify which factors determine male introduction success (i.e. male stays in the group for at least 4 weeks) and long-term stability (i.e. the male does not cause considerable behavioural problems after success) after male introductions in captive groups of rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta), creating one-male groups. We studied 64 male introductions at the breeding colony of the Biomedical Primate Research Centre in Rijswijk, The Netherlands. 49 (77%) introductions were successful, with the male obtaining a long-term stable social position in the group in 38 (59%) introductions. Introductions of males that reached at least prime age, into groups with more adult females, but without pregnant females were most successful. Moreover, long-term stability was highest when males were heavier, were at least 3.5 years old when they were first removed from their natal group, and groups had few matrilines and no pregnant females were present. Males should be introduced at the time they would naturally immigrate, when they are strongest. Moreover, groups should consist of few large matrilines, as observed in the wild, with philoatric females and males that are removed at natural age. Our study highlights the importance of composing naturalistic groups and mimicking natural migration patterns to maintain long-term stable breeding groups in captivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Minimum space allowances for laboratory rats are legislated based on weight and stocking rates, with the understanding that increased housing density encourages crowding stress. However, there is little evidence for these recommendations, especially when considering positive welfare outcomes. This study consisted of two experiments which investigated the effects of housing density (rats per cage), space allocation (surface area per rat) and social rank (dominance hierarchy) on the ability to perform simple behavioural tests. Male Sprague Dawley (SD) rats (n = 64) were allocated to either high-density (n = 8) or low-density (n = 8) cages. The second experiment investigated the effects of surface area. SD rats (n = 40) were housed in dyads in either the large (n = 10) or small (n = 10) cage. In both experiments, animals were tested on a judgment bias paradigm, with their responses to an ambiguous stimulus being ascribed as optimistic or pessimistic. Animals were also tested on open-field, novel-object recognition and social-interaction tests. Recordings were taken from 1700-2100h daily for rat observation and social rank establishment. Dominant animals responded with significantly more optimistic decisions compared to subordinates for both the housing density (p<0.001) and space allocation (p = 0.0015) experiment. Dominant animals responded with increased social affiliative behaviours in the social-interaction test, and spent more time in the centre of the open-field test for both experiments. No significance was detected between housing density or space allocation treatments. These findings suggest that social rank is a significantly greater modifier of affective state than either housing density or space allocation. This finding has not yet been reported and suggests that future drafts of housing guidelines should consider animal social status in addition to floor space requirements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although simple social structures are more common in animal societies, some taxa (mainly mammals) have complex, multi-level social systems, in which the levels reflect differential association. We develop a simulation model to explore the conditions under which multi-level social systems of this kind evolve. Our model focuses on the evolutionary trade-offs between foraging and social interaction, and explores the impact of alternative strategies for distributing social interaction, with fitness criteria for wellbeing, alliance formation, risk, stress and access to food resources that reward social strategies differentially. The results suggest that multi-level social structures characterised by a few strong relationships, more medium ties and large numbers of weak ties emerge only in a small part of the overall fitness landscape, namely where there are significant fitness benefits from wellbeing and alliance formation and there are high levels of social interaction. In contrast, ‘favour-the-few’ strategies are more competitive under a wide range of fitness conditions, including those producing homogeneous, single-level societies of the kind found in many birds and mammals. The simulations suggest that the development of complex, multi-level social structures of the kind found in many primates (including humans) depends on a capacity for high investment in social time, preferential social interaction strategies, high mortality risk and/or differential reproduction. These conditions are characteristic of only a few mammalian taxa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although social animals frequently make decisions about when or with whom to cooperate, little is known about the underlying mechanisms of partner choice. Most previous studies compared different dyads’ performances, though did not allow an actual choice among partners. We tested eleven ravens, Corvus corax, in triads, giving them first the choice to cooperate with either a highly familiar or a rather unfamiliar partner and, second, with either a friend or a non-friend using a cooperative string-pulling task. In either test, the ravens had a second choice and could cooperate with the other partner, given that this one had not pulled the string in the meantime. We show that during the experiments, these partner ravens indeed learn to wait and inhibit pulling, respectively. Moreover, the results of these two experiments show that ravens’ preferences for a specific cooperation partner are not based on familiarity. In contrast, the ravens did show a preference based on relationship quality, as they did choose to cooperate significantly more with friends than with non-friends and they were also more proficient when cooperating with a friend. In order to further identify the proximate mechanism of this preference, we designed an open-choice experiment for the whole group where all birds were free to cooperate on two separate apparatuses. This set-up allowed us to distinguish between preferences for close proximity and preferences to cooperate. The results revealed that friends preferred staying close to each other, but did not necessarily cooperate with one another, suggesting that tolerance of proximity and not relationship quality as a whole may be the driving force behind partner choice in raven cooperation. Consequently, we stress the importance of experiments that allow such titrations and, suggest that these results have important implications for the interpretations of cooperation studies that did not include open partner choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]