Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T12:57:32.902Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Space Utilization by Captive-Born Baboons (Papio sp.) Before and After Provision of Structural Enrichment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 January 2023

A L Kessel  and
L Brent
A L Kessel
Affiliation:
Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research, Department of Laboratory Animal Medicine, PO Box 28147, San Antonio, Texas 78228 USA
L Brent
Affiliation:
Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research, Department of Laboratory Animal Medicine, PO Box 28147, San Antonio, Texas 78228 USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Eight baboon groups (Papio sp.) were observed for over one hundred scan samples both before and after the provision of structural enrichment. Additions to their home-cage included a galvanized ladder suspended horizontally by chains and a plastic drum hung from the ladder. Observations were conducted for three weeks before and three weeks after the structures were added to determine changes in space use. The baboons ‘ age-sex class and location were recorded at 10 minute intervals over a 60 minute time period. Groups were categorized as small, medium or large for analysis. The baboons spent most of their time on the floor and the bench and this pattern did not change with the addition of the new structures. The female baboons used the new structures an average of 16.5 per cent of the observation time, the males used them 13.6 per cent of the time, and the infants used them 10.1 per cent of the time. Of the new structures, males, females and infants all used the ladder the most. Females and infants used areas that were inaccessible to males and no group size differences were found.

Keywords

animal welfarebaboonenrichmentgroup sizespace utilization
Type
Research Article
Information
Animal Welfare , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , February 1996 , pp. 37 - 44
Copyright
© 1996 Universities Federation for Animal Welfare

References

Altmann, J 1974b Observational study of behavior: sampling methods. Behaviour 49: 227–267CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Altmann, J 1980 Baboon Mothers and Infants. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, USAGoogle Scholar
Altmann, S A 1974a Baboons, space, time, and energy. American Zoologist 14: 221–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barton, R A 1993 Sociospatial mechanisms of feeding competition in female olive baboons, Papio anubis. Animal Behaviour 46: 791–802CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barton, R A and Whiten, A 1993 Feeding competition among female olive baboons, Papio anubis. Animal Behaviour 46: 777–789CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, B T and Spector, M R 1989 The use of naturally occurring manipulanda to improve the psychological well-being of singly housed baboons. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 194: 1782 (Abstract 107)Google Scholar
Bettinger, T, Wallis, J and Carter, T 1994 Spatial selection in captive adult female chimpanzees. Zoo Biology 13: 167–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomsmith, M A, Alford, P L and Maple, T L 1988 Successful feeding enrichment for captive chimpanzees. American Journal of Primatology 16: 155–164CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloomstrand, M, Riddle, K, Alford, P and Maple, T L 1986 Objective evaluation of a behavioral enrichment device for captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Zoo Biology 5: 293–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brent, L, Lee, D R and Eichberg, J W 1991 Evaluation of a chimpanzee enrichment enclosure. Journal of Medical Primatology 20: 29–34CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brent, L and Long, K E 1995 The behavioral response of individually caged baboons to feeding enrichment and the standard diet: a preliminary report. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 34(2): 65–69Google Scholar
Choi, G C, Canfield, R W, Hall, E C, Haynes, D R and Rice, M 1992 Environmental enrichment strategies for baboons. Contemporary Topics in Laboratory Animal Science 31(4): 6(PS06)(Abstract)Google Scholar
Dunn, O J 1964 Multiple contrasts using rank sums. Technometrics 6: 241–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goff, C, Menkhus Howell, S, Fritz, J and Nankivell, B 1994 Space use and proximity of captive chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) mother/offspring pairs. Zoo Biology 13: 61–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, W J III 1982 Baboon sleeping site preferences and relationships to primate grouping patterns. American Journal of Primatology 3: 41–53CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harding, R S O 1976 Ranging patterns of a troop of baboons (Papio anubis) in Kenya. Folia Primatologica 25: 143–185CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, D 1988 Welfare and Housing of Old World Non-human Primates (Macaca fascicularis and Papio sp.). UFAW Animal Welfare Research Report No 1, Universities Federation for Animal Welfare: Potters Bar, UKGoogle Scholar
Hedeen, S E 1982 Utilization of space by captive groups of lowland gorillas (Gorilla g. gorilla). Ohio Journal of Science 82(1): 27–30Google Scholar
Hughes G H and Menzel E W Jr 1973 Use of space and reactions to novel objects in gelada baboons (Theropithecus gelada). Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology 83: 1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jerome, C P and Szostak, L 1987 Environmental enrichment for adult, female baboons (Papio anubis). Laboratory Animal Science 37: 508–509(3)(Abstract)Google Scholar
Maki, S, Alford, P L, Bloomsmith, M A and Franklin, J 1989 Food puzzle device simulating termite fishing for captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). American Journal of Primatology (Supplement 1): 71–78Google Scholar
Maple, T L 1979 Great apes in captivity: the good, the bad, and the ugly. In: Erwin, J, Maple, T L and Mitchell, G (eds) Captivity and Behavior, Primates in Breeding Colonies, Laboratories, and Zoos pp 239–272. Van Nostrand Reinhold Company: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Maple, T L and Hoff, M P 1982 Gorilla Behavior. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Menzel, E W 1969 Chimpanzee utilization of space and responsiveness to objects: age differences and comparison with macaques. In: Carpenter CR (ed) Proceedings of the 2nd International Congress of Primatology (Atlanta, Georgia, 1968) Volume 1: Behavior pp 72-80. S Karger: Basel, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
Ogden, J J, Lindburg, D G and Maple, T L 1993 Preference for structural environmental features in captive lowland gorillas (Gorilla gorilla gorilla). Zoo Biology 4: 381–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Neill, P 1988 Developing effective social and environment enrichment strategies for macaques in captive groups. Lab Animal 17(4): 23–36Google Scholar
O’Neill, P L, Price, C and Suomi, S J 1990 Designing captive primate environments sensitive to age and gender related activity profiles for rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta). In: American Association of Zoological Parks and Aquariums (AAZPA) Regional Proceedings pp 546–551Google Scholar
Siemens-Menzies, A and Siemens, B 1992 Comparison of living space utilization by chimpanzees in two zoological exhibits. In: Proceedings ChimpanZoo Conference, not paginatedGoogle Scholar
Strum, S C 1987 Almost Human: A Journey into the World of Baboons. Random House: New York, USAGoogle Scholar
Stynes, A J, Rosenblum, L A and Kaufman, I C 1968 The dominant male and behavior within heterospecific monkey groups. Folia Primatologica 9: 123–134CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taff, M A and Dolhinow, P 1989 Langur monkeys (Presbytis entellus) in captivity. In: Segal, EF (ed) Housing, Care, and Psychological Wellbeing of Captive and Laboratory Primates pp 291–304. Noyes Publications: Park Ridge, USAGoogle Scholar
Traylor-Holzer, K and Fritz, P 1985 Utilization of space by adult and juvenile groups of captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Zoo Biology 4: 115–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, C C 1972 Spatial factors and the behavior of nonhuman primates. Folia Primatologica 18: 256–275CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed